Hello!
I got some inspiration to put ten years ago purchased FRS8 in use
These are made from Finnish cardboard, the product of world famous Finland's forest industry!
Two leayers of cardboard clued together.
Clued also foam to damp most of wall vibrations.
Ready!
I got some inspiration to put ten years ago purchased FRS8 in use
These are made from Finnish cardboard, the product of world famous Finland's forest industry!
Two leayers of cardboard clued together.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Clued also foam to damp most of wall vibrations.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Ready!
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
interesting indeed, two great stories by Stanislaw Lem come to my mind as very relevant
The Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Chain of Chance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello!
Yesterday I listened several hours! First impression: NOT BAD !
Note: I have 3 elements in the box, but I only listened the two side firing elements, i.e. the front element was mute. I feed left channel to left element and the same for right side accordingly. No filtering, No equalisation, just raw signal !
My room is about 3.5 m wide. The box is placed in the center line, and about 1.5 m from the front wall (the wall facing the listener). Listening distance was about 2 m.
First test: Acoustic classical piece:
This box images! I can hear phantoms to at least +/-30 degrees. No worse than normal stereo !
Where is my front wall ?? Who put the orchestra 10 m behind the speaker?
I can turn my head without collapse of imaging ! Better than normal stereo where image allways jumps to the speaker if I turn my head.
Second test: Studio pop piece:
This sucks ! #1 The sound comes from the center. Don't sound natural. Suspectedly the mixer put the singer in the middle and there she is, rock solid.. But phantoms.. never heard any.
This sucks ! #2 No bass and no treble. Ok, this is a problem of FRS8, the poor man's allarounder fullrange. During the 10 years they have been collecting dust, since I didn't manage to make any proper use of them. Even listening on axis the treble is bad. And of cource no bass.
Conclusions so far:
But the recordings made in natural ambiance.. They sound so good, so correct, so natural. This has great potential. I'm amazed ! This could be the next big thing after the dipole line arrays and the wavelet transform
- Elias
Yesterday I listened several hours! First impression: NOT BAD !
Note: I have 3 elements in the box, but I only listened the two side firing elements, i.e. the front element was mute. I feed left channel to left element and the same for right side accordingly. No filtering, No equalisation, just raw signal !
My room is about 3.5 m wide. The box is placed in the center line, and about 1.5 m from the front wall (the wall facing the listener). Listening distance was about 2 m.
First test: Acoustic classical piece:
This box images! I can hear phantoms to at least +/-30 degrees. No worse than normal stereo !
Where is my front wall ?? Who put the orchestra 10 m behind the speaker?
I can turn my head without collapse of imaging ! Better than normal stereo where image allways jumps to the speaker if I turn my head.
Second test: Studio pop piece:
This sucks ! #1 The sound comes from the center. Don't sound natural. Suspectedly the mixer put the singer in the middle and there she is, rock solid.. But phantoms.. never heard any.
This sucks ! #2 No bass and no treble. Ok, this is a problem of FRS8, the poor man's allarounder fullrange. During the 10 years they have been collecting dust, since I didn't manage to make any proper use of them. Even listening on axis the treble is bad. And of cource no bass.
Conclusions so far:
But the recordings made in natural ambiance.. They sound so good, so correct, so natural. This has great potential. I'm amazed ! This could be the next big thing after the dipole line arrays and the wavelet transform
- Elias
I suspect there is some common logic behind what a stereolith-type box and a Crosstalk Cancelled Stereo Dipole are doing. Graaff first pointed this out at the ambiophonics thread.
For one, toeing-out the speakers in my CCSD improves the presentation. An extreme toe-out so as to render the speakers facing opposite sides (a stereolith to all intents and purposes) sounds surprisingly good.
I have sat behind my CCSD ( Picture this: you are looking at the back of your speakers, which are seating touching each other in the middle of the room, with some crosstalk cancelling device in the chain- via a mattress or DSP) and the sound had a naturalness to it that no other presentation has ever delivered in my experience.
I believe that a precise combination of all these aspects will deliver a better sound than either of the two approaches alone.
For one, toeing-out the speakers in my CCSD improves the presentation. An extreme toe-out so as to render the speakers facing opposite sides (a stereolith to all intents and purposes) sounds surprisingly good.
I have sat behind my CCSD ( Picture this: you are looking at the back of your speakers, which are seating touching each other in the middle of the room, with some crosstalk cancelling device in the chain- via a mattress or DSP) and the sound had a naturalness to it that no other presentation has ever delivered in my experience.
I believe that a precise combination of all these aspects will deliver a better sound than either of the two approaches alone.
Last edited:
yes, this is also my hypothesis and actually there are also diyaudio users who are currently working exactly on the combination
Hello!
Looking already for the future..
Idea: Extending listening experience using the system panostereolithically
Similar to Panorambiophonics Home Page
- Elias
Looking already for the future..
Idea: Extending listening experience using the system panostereolithically
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Similar to Panorambiophonics Home Page
- Elias
Keep cool kids...
Because finally everybody says the same things with his words,
Could it be Elias that thinks of future development, Markus that pinpoints the big issue, or Poldus that confirms that with any kind of XTC this design becomes really amazing.
I agree with everybody. But I am ready to think that the Real Eagle will have the
same qualities and problems, except if...
If what ? There is a solution that makes the pan potted records sounding like the binaural, without compromizing these last ones. I am actually building a very different speaker that will give a better insight.
As the discussion was a little bit funny, the most adventurous could try to resolve the enigma . I have to say that it's not DSP based, no delays, no all pass, no phase inversion, no pre convolved records, and it works outdoors.
One last clue : this has something to see with the architecture of the central nervous system, french students say "Ô Oscar, ma petite théière me fait à grand peine six gorgées".
In case that some of you want to compare the cardboard queen with normal speakers, here is a test : it's 2 series of clicks, first one with a rotation of 180°, second one with a 360° rotation.
Both my central sources systems can resolve this and show the rotating simulated source turning around the speakers, 180° and 360° being recognizable. But on my basic 60° system it's just right/left/right/left...fidelity ?
I would like to know what's up with a good conventional system. Markus ?
PS : it's not a Zip, rename it with .mp3
Because finally everybody says the same things with his words,
Could it be Elias that thinks of future development, Markus that pinpoints the big issue, or Poldus that confirms that with any kind of XTC this design becomes really amazing.
I agree with everybody. But I am ready to think that the Real Eagle will have the
same qualities and problems, except if...
If what ? There is a solution that makes the pan potted records sounding like the binaural, without compromizing these last ones. I am actually building a very different speaker that will give a better insight.
As the discussion was a little bit funny, the most adventurous could try to resolve the enigma . I have to say that it's not DSP based, no delays, no all pass, no phase inversion, no pre convolved records, and it works outdoors.
One last clue : this has something to see with the architecture of the central nervous system, french students say "Ô Oscar, ma petite théière me fait à grand peine six gorgées".
In case that some of you want to compare the cardboard queen with normal speakers, here is a test : it's 2 series of clicks, first one with a rotation of 180°, second one with a 360° rotation.
Both my central sources systems can resolve this and show the rotating simulated source turning around the speakers, 180° and 360° being recognizable. But on my basic 60° system it's just right/left/right/left...fidelity ?
I would like to know what's up with a good conventional system. Markus ?
PS : it's not a Zip, rename it with .mp3
Last edited:
Hi,
In the file there is only one series of clicks ?
- Elias
In the file there is only one series of clicks ?
- Elias
Keep cool kids...
Because finally everybody says the same things with his words,
Could it be Elias that thinks of future development, Markus that pinpoints the big issue, or Poldus that confirms that with any kind of XTC this design becomes really amazing.
I agree with everybody. But I am ready to think that the Real Eagle will have the
same qualities and problems, except if...
If what ? There is a solution that makes the pan potted records sounding like the binaural, without compromizing these last ones. I am actually building a very different speaker that will give a better insight.
As the discussion was a little bit funny, the most adventurous could try to resolve the enigma . I have to say that it's not DSP based, no delays, no all pass, no phase inversion, no pre convolved records, and it works outdoors.
One last clue : this has something to see with the architecture of the central nervous system, french students say "Ô Oscar, ma petite théière me fait à grand peine six gorgées".
In case that some of you want to compare the cardboard queen with normal speakers, here is a test : it's 2 series of clicks, first one with a rotation of 180°, second one with a 360° rotation.
Both my central sources systems can resolve this and show the rotating simulated source turning around the speakers, 180° and 360° being recognizable. But on my basic 60° system it's just right/left/right/left...fidelity ?
I would like to know what's up with a good conventional system. Markus ?
PS : it's not a Zip, rename it with .mp3
Radugazon, both examples give me the same sensation of clicks moving from the frontal center to the right, to a rather undefined and distant location, to the back, to a rather undefined left location, to the frontal center. This is with the Stereolith.
The Geddes Nathans give me the same perception with the frontal side movement being very defined whereas the back location is very undefined.
The Geddes Nathans give me the same perception with the frontal side movement being very defined whereas the back location is very undefined.
Several posts with personal attacks have been removed. While vigorous technical debate is encouraged, personal attacks are against forum rules. Any further violations will result in several days of "read only" status.It is forum policy not to edit member posts, so unfortunately, some technical content has been collateral damage. If you want your technical arguments to remain, do not include gratuitous insults.
@ Elias : the two series are just separated by a 2s silence, my bad
@ markus: the signal electrically starts effectively frontal, then right, center, left...
the difference between the half and the total turn is that in the 180° the clicks shift abruptly from left to right, where the 360° goes behind the speaker. (But these notions are by nature totally subjective, plus the guy that did the signal is the last one to trust).
This makes your observations interesting. Is it corresponding somewhere with the rendering of each type of speakers? Say more defined , more lateralization for the Nathan and more depth for the stereolith?
@ markus: the signal electrically starts effectively frontal, then right, center, left...
the difference between the half and the total turn is that in the 180° the clicks shift abruptly from left to right, where the 360° goes behind the speaker. (But these notions are by nature totally subjective, plus the guy that did the signal is the last one to trust).
This makes your observations interesting. Is it corresponding somewhere with the rendering of each type of speakers? Say more defined , more lateralization for the Nathan and more depth for the stereolith?
The techniques are not written in the pamflets and thus unknown to the listener. From how it sounds one can guess what is being used, maybe best one can do is to group similar sounding techniques, but to know what is being used exactly is beyond the available.
- Elias
- Elias
Radugazon, how is this signal processed? Looks like it's simple intensity stereophony?