The greatest advantage of full-range speakers, in my opinion, is their ability to extend vocal fortissimo naturally.
General multiway speakers (with LCR networks) often fail to reproduce the same open and extended vocals as full-range speakers.
Even high-end multiway speakers can sometimes make fortissimo passages sound compressed.
I asked ChatGPT a question
[QUESTION]
Why do multiway speakers (with LCR network) have poor vocal fortissimo extension compared to full-range speakers?
[ANSWER]
Multiway speakers with an LCR network (inductor-capacitor-resistor) often have poorer vocal fortissimo extension compared to full-range speakers due to several factors related to crossover design, phase issues, and driver limitations. Here’s why:
### 1. Crossover-Induced Energy Loss & Damping
- Multiway speakers rely on crossovers to split frequencies among drivers. These passive LCR networks introduce energy losses due to component resistance and impedance mismatches, reducing transient response and dynamic range.
- Inductors in the midrange and woofer circuits can limit the rise time of transients, making fortissimo passages sound less explosive.
- Some crossovers over-damp the midrange, making vocals sound compressed compared to full-range speakers.
### 2. Phase Shift & Time Alignment Issues
- Crossovers introduce phase shifts, especially around crossover points, which can cause destructive interference and loss of coherence in loud vocal peaks.
- In a full-range speaker, the entire signal comes from a single driver, avoiding phase misalignment that can soften high-energy transients.
### 3. Driver Interaction & Compression
- In multiway speakers, multiple drivers (midrange & tweeter) attempt to reproduce vocal harmonics, but integration issues can cause cancellation effects or uneven dispersion at high SPLs.
- Multiway drivers often have different efficiency levels, leading to uneven power handling during loud peaks.
- Some midrange drivers have limited excursion, causing dynamic compression at high SPLs, whereas full-range drivers are designed to handle the entire vocal range without a handoff.
### 4. Cohesion & Direct Radiator Effect
- Full-range drivers radiate sound from a single point, ensuring phase coherence and direct radiating energy, leading to a more natural projection of vocal intensity.
- Multiway systems introduce lobing effects (interference between separated drivers), which can reduce perceived vocal presence at high volumes.
### 5. LCR Network Damping Effects
- The impedance of a crossover network interacts with the amplifier’s output impedance, sometimes reducing the damping factor and affecting transient sharpness.
- In contrast, full-range drivers typically run with minimal or no crossover components, allowing for direct amplifier-to-driver coupling and faster transient response.
### Why Full-Range Speakers Perform Better in Vocal Fortissimo
- No crossover-induced phase shifts or energy losses.
- A single diaphragm handling the entire frequency range ensures better coherence.
- Direct coupling to the amplifier maximizes transient response.
- No multi-driver interference or lobing effects.
This is why single-driver, full-range speakers are often preferred for vocal reproduction, especially in high-dynamic passages like operatic or live performances.
-----------------------------------------------------------
[ Air-Recording ]
"Danny Boy - Jacinta" listened to with 1.5” full-range (1.5 USD) and Bluetooth Amplifier (6.5 USD)
General multiway speakers (with LCR networks) often fail to reproduce the same open and extended vocals as full-range speakers.
Even high-end multiway speakers can sometimes make fortissimo passages sound compressed.
I asked ChatGPT a question
[QUESTION]
Why do multiway speakers (with LCR network) have poor vocal fortissimo extension compared to full-range speakers?
[ANSWER]
Multiway speakers with an LCR network (inductor-capacitor-resistor) often have poorer vocal fortissimo extension compared to full-range speakers due to several factors related to crossover design, phase issues, and driver limitations. Here’s why:
### 1. Crossover-Induced Energy Loss & Damping
- Multiway speakers rely on crossovers to split frequencies among drivers. These passive LCR networks introduce energy losses due to component resistance and impedance mismatches, reducing transient response and dynamic range.
- Inductors in the midrange and woofer circuits can limit the rise time of transients, making fortissimo passages sound less explosive.
- Some crossovers over-damp the midrange, making vocals sound compressed compared to full-range speakers.
### 2. Phase Shift & Time Alignment Issues
- Crossovers introduce phase shifts, especially around crossover points, which can cause destructive interference and loss of coherence in loud vocal peaks.
- In a full-range speaker, the entire signal comes from a single driver, avoiding phase misalignment that can soften high-energy transients.
### 3. Driver Interaction & Compression
- In multiway speakers, multiple drivers (midrange & tweeter) attempt to reproduce vocal harmonics, but integration issues can cause cancellation effects or uneven dispersion at high SPLs.
- Multiway drivers often have different efficiency levels, leading to uneven power handling during loud peaks.
- Some midrange drivers have limited excursion, causing dynamic compression at high SPLs, whereas full-range drivers are designed to handle the entire vocal range without a handoff.
### 4. Cohesion & Direct Radiator Effect
- Full-range drivers radiate sound from a single point, ensuring phase coherence and direct radiating energy, leading to a more natural projection of vocal intensity.
- Multiway systems introduce lobing effects (interference between separated drivers), which can reduce perceived vocal presence at high volumes.
### 5. LCR Network Damping Effects
- The impedance of a crossover network interacts with the amplifier’s output impedance, sometimes reducing the damping factor and affecting transient sharpness.
- In contrast, full-range drivers typically run with minimal or no crossover components, allowing for direct amplifier-to-driver coupling and faster transient response.
### Why Full-Range Speakers Perform Better in Vocal Fortissimo
- No crossover-induced phase shifts or energy losses.
- A single diaphragm handling the entire frequency range ensures better coherence.
- Direct coupling to the amplifier maximizes transient response.
- No multi-driver interference or lobing effects.
This is why single-driver, full-range speakers are often preferred for vocal reproduction, especially in high-dynamic passages like operatic or live performances.
-----------------------------------------------------------
[ Air-Recording ]
"Danny Boy - Jacinta" listened to with 1.5” full-range (1.5 USD) and Bluetooth Amplifier (6.5 USD)
Attachments
I'd never argue personal preference, and (obviously) I use wideband drivers extensively -I'm a consultant to Markaudio & enjoy the design creativity. That said, I don't see them as a panacea either & I design & run multiways as much -sometimes using wideband drivers as mid-tweeters in traditional 2-ways, which are one of my favourite system types, taken as a general / practical set of compromises.
The ChatGPT (as usual) seems to be giving select answers according to how the question is biased / what people want to hear though. For e.g.:
a/ Unfiltered wideband drivers are much more, not less, likely to have dynamic compression due to being exposed to low frequency power demands, which are, or should be, filtered off in a competent multiway with dedicated midrange units. And
b/ Part of the design process of a multiway is to select drive units that can do what you need them to do. Again, if they can't, the source of the issue is to be found in the mirror.
The ChatGPT (as usual) seems to be giving select answers according to how the question is biased / what people want to hear though. For e.g.:
We've started with a leading / biased question, since it assumes as a fact that multiway speakers have poor vocal fortissimo extension compared to single driver types. Which frankly isn't true. There are good examples of both types.
...as if wideband drivers don't have limitations. 😉
Which straight away is wrong -most multiway systems tend to have greater dynamic range than single driver types, not less. Some exceptions, but taken broadly this is the case.
'Over-damped' implies SPL reduction. So if you don't want that, design the crossover competently so you have the response you want! QED. The point is that as far as crossover design goes: you're the one in charge. If your system isn't behaving as you want due to issues with the crossover, the source of the issue is actually to be found in the mirror. 😉
Potentially, although the majority of acoustic research indicates that within fairly broad limits phase rotation is inaudible in normal loudspeakers & normal listening conditions -it's other factors that can come into play, like power response, lobing etc. Which comes back to system design & optimisation -that's the job of the designer.
Which takes us back to the same response as above: design it properly, then. 😉
Complete drivel, since in any competent multiway you are shaping the response in the filter to a desired result.
Which has two answers:
a/ Unfiltered wideband drivers are much more, not less, likely to have dynamic compression due to being exposed to low frequency power demands, which are, or should be, filtered off in a competent multiway with dedicated midrange units. And
b/ Part of the design process of a multiway is to select drive units that can do what you need them to do. Again, if they can't, the source of the issue is to be found in the mirror.
Ejecting the subjective rubbish it's parroting, the first part is mostly true, or potentially so; the second part less so: the key word there is 'can' (not 'will') since not all systems are the same & it will vary accordingly. Why it's singling out 'high volumes' rather than any level though is a bit mysterious.
Series resistance from components do reduce the electrical damping; this is almost exclusively an issue for the LF leg & should be accounted for in the design -preferably with low DCR components. 'Transient sharpness' (whatever is meant by that) needs to be taken in the context of the overall system response though.
Not necessarily. It can do, but it's not a given. Transient response below the mass corner frequency is a function of the driver / enclosure system. Above, in the mass-controlled piston BW, it's a function of coil inductance & diameter. And above that, where TL / resonant / bending modes take over, it's a function of the cone / sub-emitter / suspension materials, dimensions, profiles, thicknesses.
Because most multiways introduce phase shifts in the mids of 1 to 3 khz, where the ear is most sensitive there is a loss in dynamics which cannot be brought back without some FIR use.
This fact has long time been neglected but since the use of phase compensation by professionals it gets more and more recognized.
This fact has long time been neglected but since the use of phase compensation by professionals it gets more and more recognized.
I damn well don't. 😉 I want nothing to do with it, and as I've said elsewhere (no reason anybody here should know) I strongly request that nothing I say or write is ever fed into one of those things.
Eh? There is a loss of dynamic range? How? Last I checked that was a matter of sensitivity & power-handling in a system context.
I ran out of the will to live 40 seconds into the linked video's audiophile buzz-word riddled twaddle.
Oh, I've no option in it, in the same way I can't (couldn't) stop people trawling forums for information to exploit. I can only make my own stance clear and hope that people respect it.
@Scottmoose
Taken a correct step response - most multiways cannot reproduce it. Fullrange driver if linear enough can do that.
If a signal gets smeared in time the impulse can never have/contain the same energy.
You really should watch the video.
Taken a correct step response - most multiways cannot reproduce it. Fullrange driver if linear enough can do that.
If a signal gets smeared in time the impulse can never have/contain the same energy.
You really should watch the video.
Haha 😂, these days I see that few people ever agree, including “ Audiophiles “! And now AI too!!
Hahahahahaha😄😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
Hahahahahaha😄😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
Hi Scott, thanks for all your advices.
I don't think Chat GPT is 100% reliable.
Still, some people say that it is more trustworthy than manufacturers' advertisements or magazine articles.
It's difficult to evaluate audio because there is a large element of personal subjectivity and preference.
What I found most interesting was this response in that me and quite a few others (like just about everybody I knew at the time WRT the new 'stereo' records/systems) was that a good mono system properly positioned in room had superior 'you are there' performance.
Note these were typically large 12-15" 'FR', co/tri ax or large Altec or similar 2 way systems.
Note these were typically large 12-15" 'FR', co/tri ax or large Altec or similar 2 way systems.
Please tell more.
Doing diy while collecting vintage speaker drivers I've listened quite enjoyably to a lot of "mono" (one channel of a stereo recording). A lot of music have a center soloist, palpably imaged well behind the single speaker (even wall), in fact a little deeper than the same speakers in stereo, with accompaniments further back or diffuse so as to not "fight" the soloist's image and lines, surrounded by venue's sense-of-space and air. Especially with head partially turned to one side (as if in a stereo triangle). Necessary conditon being speaker quality, coherence, and extension. Which is why I think depth perception is primarily a monophonic phenomenon.
Last edited:
I think both of you are having trouble with generalities. One says some speakers have X, and the other says the designer should have taken X into account. Maybe you two are arguing past each other?
My view: I don't know that I've heard crossover compression, but I know it must happen just by the nature of inductors. In my experience power compression of amplifiers is way more common. Some of the best loudspeakers I have heard are two and three way, they are also some of the absolute worst. In general they realize complicated dense music well. The best dynamics are reproduced by horn loudspeakers, nothing new there. I agree with OP that full range loudspeakers render female vocals the best. I'm not sure why, probably due in part to the many affects he pointed out. One theory I read was that a 4-5" loudspeaker is approximately the size of a human head and that makes the illusion of reproducing a human voice that much better. I dunno? I think the clarity of female vocals comes with a cost of lost lower midrange and bass. Full range speakers work great as nearfield speakers where it takes less power to be acoustically loud. They are horrible reproducing low bass and loud musical passages because distortion quickly becomes huge for 200hz and below. Things I like played on full range speakers are jazz combos, smaller classical groups, and for some reason metal. Large format speakers are for bombastic pieces of music, pipe organ, drums, Wagner, R. Strauss, Bruckner, prog-rock. Finally, YMMV.
In my non-audio-engineer experience/opinion, dynamic articulation ~ micro-dynamic linearity tended to suffer before macro-dynamic compression. At a given cost and complexity, and driven by simpler amplification, fullranges tended to have some advantages (in normal-SPL dynamics) over multiways bluntly crossed-over with a bunch of cheapy parts (most commercial speakers). If greater expertise and better materials are available then more degrees of freedom in multiways design can help (a lot).
I was just refering to the long neglected importance of the time domain.
Its just difficult to build a multiway which excels also in this category as its difficult for fullranges to compete in all the other aspects of loudspeaker quality criteria.
For both you find good examples for good sound.
However there is some truth in it that headphones and fullranges in TV sound good and natural if made decent.
In my opinion its rarely made a fullrange loudspeaker applying all technical advancements of driver building. And so rarely people believe that they can be taken serious in terms of hifi if made well.
Its just difficult to build a multiway which excels also in this category as its difficult for fullranges to compete in all the other aspects of loudspeaker quality criteria.
For both you find good examples for good sound.
However there is some truth in it that headphones and fullranges in TV sound good and natural if made decent.
In my opinion its rarely made a fullrange loudspeaker applying all technical advancements of driver building. And so rarely people believe that they can be taken serious in terms of hifi if made well.
Last edited:
Recently I got one (not pair) maop10 so I purchased one more.Its not matched at all MMS are around 10g and 8g. Now I need to buy a pair.
The box is not completed yet.
Also adjusted SB satori 2way monitor stepped baffle completely.
I changed tweeter position 1mm by 1mm to find perfect position.
(SB acoustic satori monitor thread guru clone)
2 way monitor sounding much better than single wide ranger over all but some vocal music with wide ranger sounding so much fun.
I feel like observing sound wave.
I wonder if the sharrow cone make it different like alpair 11ms.
The box is not completed yet.
Also adjusted SB satori 2way monitor stepped baffle completely.
I changed tweeter position 1mm by 1mm to find perfect position.
(SB acoustic satori monitor thread guru clone)
2 way monitor sounding much better than single wide ranger over all but some vocal music with wide ranger sounding so much fun.
I feel like observing sound wave.
My love with fullrange speakers started as a kid, when I listened to my granpa's tube radio with oval fullranges. Later when I started tinkering with electonics, I salvaged such speakers from old tube radios and some TV sets.
During my teenage days, when I built my first amp, run with some 6.5" car fullrange speakers, I discovered that they had some " magic" that multiway's didn't, that is, I could close my eyes and see the singer in front of me. Spooky, that is.
Since then, I read alot and learned a lot about fullrange speakers, tried various ones, small big, get to know their deficiencies and limitations.
But, despite all of that, they still manage to do what multiways struggle: That spooky image...and that't why I (still) love them.
During my teenage days, when I built my first amp, run with some 6.5" car fullrange speakers, I discovered that they had some " magic" that multiway's didn't, that is, I could close my eyes and see the singer in front of me. Spooky, that is.
Since then, I read alot and learned a lot about fullrange speakers, tried various ones, small big, get to know their deficiencies and limitations.
But, despite all of that, they still manage to do what multiways struggle: That spooky image...and that't why I (still) love them.
@Vix
I had a great sonic result with a cfa amp and a fullrange driver with polyprop cone!
I had a great sonic result with a cfa amp and a fullrange driver with polyprop cone!
Works very well and the Pioneer 13cm fullrange unit in the wooden "bestonesound" box does not need any extra eq for good sound.
Impossible with a voltage driven amp.
Impossible with a voltage driven amp.