and conventional stereo is supposed to have it's state of the art, engineering standards, design consensus and so on for over 60 years now
now here we are talking about something novel ....
Talking about flooders, back in '68...
Talking about flooders, back in '68...
and what supposedly is this? because I can see nothing short close to the floor neither anything having up-firing speakers
geezz erjee can't You read?? do not want to?? I even posted photos and You still don't understand... what's the problem?
the only historical speakers qualifying as flooders were perhaps some Sonab models by Stig Carlsson
Last edited:
I am a bit, a well, flooded with all this talk about flooders. The Bose 901 was revolutionary at that time, it turned into a commercial succes made Bose a big company. Although pointing upwards, your flooders will illuminate the frontwall substantially, just like the Bose 901 (8 speakers at the backside).
But can we come back to something more substantial? You made a very valid comment on one of my assumptions:
I am a bit lost in this topic, can you give me some references, I'm mostly interested.
but ideal flooder? You want specific directivity pattern?
c'mon Elias!aren't we discussing for the nth time the question of ideal directivity pattern for conventional stereo speakers!?
Actually there is no mention about conventional in the thread title so discussion is allowed
I do have stereo flooders at the moment !
Actually they are multipurpose closed box speakers capable to transform into e.g. stereolithic projection and flooder among others. And no cardboard this time but solid Finnish pine. The driver is Fe126En. Just finished these boxes resently.Earlier in this thread I described the results of the pink noise tests with these flooders. The problem: With pink noise at high freqs I can now locate the speakers on the floor !
With real music not so badly, but tests are in early stage.Just last week I listened music one evening with stereo flooder placement, and based on that I conclude that there is some details missing in the midrange. In comparison, my dipole line array deliver phenomenal midrange detail and I like them because of that. Midrange is the most important range for music reproduction. In this sense flooder is lacking.
Stereoliths are totally different animal, since they do something fundamantally right which is immediately apparent even using a cardboard box with very cheap elements ! I did not have the same feeling with the flooder. But with stereolith I still have some hard time to convince others the direct sound must be blocked
So it's not easy for me either Maybe it's time for you to DIY something !!!
Let me help:
- cross talk cancelling system
- dipole line array
- multible small subs
- constant directivity horn
- etc etc
So many things to explore ! After finish all this maybe you feel no need to disscuss about flooder anymore
- Elias
I do have stereo flooders at the moment !
...
The driver is Fe126En.
not sure but might be to small, but this depends on positioning and listening distance perhaps
Earlier in this thread I described the results of the pink noise tests with these flooders. The problem: With pink noise at high freqs I can now locate the speakers on the floor !
how are they positioned in the room? what's the listening distance?
and stereolitic setup is not lacking in this sense?
hm... how to put it politely? yeah, I know - just give me a break Elias!
without my DIY You wouldn't ever even hear about stereolitic setup not to mention testing and developing it
I have build 3 stereolits during 2005 and I have brought the idea to the forum, the short 2006 thread was long dead by then
sorry, I am not a technical person, basically a music lover, and my life changed a lot since my experimenting period of 2005 - two kids on board and a lot of work
now I haven't got time nor place to play with those things anymore, not even enough time to listen to music as much as I would like to
besides I am interested in this particular factor of realism of sound reproduction which is unique to both setups - stereolitic and flooder - natural spaciousness
I do not need cross talk cancelling system, neither dipole line array can give me anything in this regard, not to mention multible small subs or constant directivity horns
You may add me to that list, too. Speakers are all nude (no baffles), 2x Beyma 15XA38Nd (PA coax) + 4x 18" woofers (reduced to 2 lately). Tweeter is moderately wide dispersion (for a coax) because it's diffraction based, and bass and lower midrange have some serious total cone area to wastefully play with.Humdinger, Just want to check are you from this planet ?!?
You got:
cross talk cancelling
Wow! That is my concept exactly
And I'm using partial crosstalk cancellation (about -20dB down) as well, less for the reason of broadening the image (which it also does) but more for the effect of giving phantom images a systematic (signal dependent) vertical size/height impression, while eg reverb tails get a "volume" they act in (instead of a "plane"). These, to me, positive effects I stumbled upon by accident (they are a side-effects) when playing with speaker crosstalk cancelling (a game I'm in for now 10yrs or so).
Ever thought about simple or frequency dependent rematrixing from 2 to 3 channels, known under names like Trinaural (Bongiorno), Optimum Linear Matrix (Miles), TriField (Gerzon)?
Trinaural (and OLM) is very easy to implement and has quite something to it (some get instantly hooked), notably a stable "real" mono center and convincing general illusion with high separation between direct and reverberant/diffuse sounds of the recording, and as an important difference, a higher immunity to sweetspot offsets and head rotation. A lot, again, comes from comb filtering (right in the speaker signals!) for any interchannel delayed content, and mostly from very different room exitation in many regards. Also, the interchange of real and phantom image sources is interesting (L- or R-only signals become phantoms while phantom mono center becomes --more-- real). Makes things for the better with very many recordings.
It may not be to everyone's likings as it is different/unconventional and not free of side-effects (as is two speaker stereo, OTOH), it is even considered as blasphemy by some. Plus again it opens the question of perfect directivity as eg trading effects are needed here, too...
I have no space for a permanent third speaker and I'd run out of DAC channels in my fully active system, but otherwise I'd go for Trinaural especially in more problematic listening setups than my main stereo (read : tried it and liked it, much better than two speakers only, disrespecting the "technical incorrectness" of the approach one surely could argue about).
- Klaus
Klaus, my modified Carver "holographic generator" (inter-aural cancellation circuit) has about 6dB of attenuation on the cross-coupled inverted correction signals. That's what this particular Carver schematic (that I got on the grey market) was set to. I had no reason to change that. I messed with the EQ when I found the center phantom image to be too mid-rangey and weak. It sounds like you're saying that you prefer the correction signal to be attenuated by 20dB?
I'm glad someone is interested in center channel synthesis. I'm working on a five channel surround extractor circuit right now. The center output is the only one that I am actively steering. I'm rectifying and detecting both the L+R and the L-R, and using the difference, or just the L+R to drive the VCA on the center output. I'm planning on letting it vary the amplitude of the center out by 3dB. Just enough to make a useful difference, but not enough that the steering is audible as an anomoly. In the upper midrange I expect this to work great. In the lower midrange, I'm concerned about it confusing the timing cue information coming from the front left and right speakers, where I employ the inter-aural cancellation circuit. I will have four section Baxandall tone controls on each output, so I can experiment with cutting the amplituded of the center channel signal below maybe 1kHZ (and perhaps making up for it in the left and right front speakers which will always be putting out a significant amount of the L+R signal components). As with all of my projects, they are experiments, where I won't be surprised to learn a few new things (often the hard way).
To do any better it seems that one would have to put a VCA on all five outputs, and have a rather sophisticated circuit driving them (like Dolby ProLogic II), but I have Pro Logic II and I'm not sure I want to have the center signals only come out of the center speaker. Some dialog is hard to hear clearly, when the other four speakers are spewing away. My surround arrangement is actually a half circle of five speakers. The side speakers will get what I call an L-XR signal, done with opamps, which gets rid of most of the L+R content without collapsing the stereo effect. The circuit is similar to the Holographic generator circuit, but no delay on the inverted crossfed signal. I think this will work better with music, while conventional ProLogic or equiv. may work better for most movies. I'll have function bypass switches so it's easy to switch back to the ProLogic steering in my AV receiver when I want. My outputs will go through a Lexicon MX400 Quad reverb, which can be configured any imaginable way, and sounds very good and cost only $300. My side speakers are at the ceiling, maybe 6 feet back from the front wall, almost back to where my ears are, and aimed directly across at each other. I heard that arrangement back in the 1970's and never forgot how good it worked pshycho-acoustically. I welcome any feedback on any of this.
@Elias
post scriptum
so many boring things, so many dead horses beaten
line arrays? OBs? corner horns? so You are interested in a total direct sound approach for a change?
then let me help You:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196140-line-array.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/164797-200-x-2-drivers-what-do.html
try such an OB!
someone may say graaf is going over the top as usual - my answer is - enough beaten horses around! why wasting time and effort for boring things!?
and do not forget about this, it is also a terra incognita:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196434-e-j-jordan-delay-line.html
talking about multiple small subs... what a challenge... he he...
post scriptum
so many boring things, so many dead horses beaten
line arrays? OBs? corner horns? so You are interested in a total direct sound approach for a change?
then let me help You:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196140-line-array.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/164797-200-x-2-drivers-what-do.html
try such an OB!
someone may say graaf is going over the top as usual - my answer is - enough beaten horses around! why wasting time and effort for boring things!?
and do not forget about this, it is also a terra incognita:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196434-e-j-jordan-delay-line.html
talking about multiple small subs... what a challenge... he he...
No, I'm not interested about "total direct sound" because my goal is clear:
And because of that, not any of these will satisfy:
then let me help You:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196140-line-array.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/164797-200-x-2-drivers-what-do.html
try such an OB!
...
and do not forget about this, it is also a terra incognita:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/196434-e-j-jordan-delay-line.html
neither I am interested in total direct sound, so why should I try corner horns etc.? What for?
my goal is realism, natural spaciousness included, and to have it some requirements have to be met as to the pattern of reflections producing appropriately low IACC, not preferred by some of the occupationally biased pros
are You sure that high directivity at bass and midrange, and low directivity at the treble is the way to go? Have You actually tested such setup? Any scence behind it?
well, as to high directivity at bass and midrange - is it not high enough with the 10x10 array? c'mon Elias!
and what about Jordan array? Haven't You called it an ideal stereo solution Yourself?
post scriptum
not sure but might be to small, but this depends on positioning and listening distance perhaps
how are they positioned in the room? what's the listening distance?
and stereolitic setup is not lacking in this sense?
as to the ideal directivity it is interesting to note that while You say You enjoy Your stereolitic boxes Your own design choices differ significantly from Schupbach's (looks like original Stereolith is all about low directivity)
not sure but might be to small, but this depends on positioning and listening distance perhaps
how are they positioned in the room? what's the listening distance?
and stereolitic setup is not lacking in this sense?
as to the ideal directivity it is interesting to note that while You say You enjoy Your stereolitic boxes Your own design choices differ significantly from Schupbach's (looks like original Stereolith is all about low directivity)
no feud here really - I am sorry if it looks like one
but we are just discussing different concepts of ideal directivity pattern for stereo speakers -stereolit is an example, Elias' concept is another
I hope there is nothing wrong in that?
I'm probably not allowed to tell, but graaf is currently working on a three-way flooder.
At bass freqs stereolith sucked because it's just an omni monopole which is allways bad in a small room. However in midrange, according to my tests, it was better than the flooder. The appeal for stereolith comes, I suppose, from the spaciouness which sounds very good on selected recordings. Sidefiring systems generates a lot of lateral plane reflections (good) whereas flooder generates a lot of median plane reflections which do not add optimally to spaciousness but increases temporal and freq domain masking which hides the small details from the recording (bad).
That's why flooder may not have optimal directivity pattern for a stereo loudspeaker in the bass and midrange.
An extra benefit of stereolithic projection is the tweeters are not directly preceivable because 90 degrees toe.
- Elias
I haven't noticed that, however perhaps I just don't have this:
of Yours, not being used to those OB-arrays
another hypothesis is that it's a matter of a too low directivity of a too small driver combined with specific listening distance and angle, my flooders (Fostex 206, UniQ) were surely more directional, the response was more dominated by the combined direct sound and first ceiling reflection
so they are perceivable on the flooder (on music, not test signals)?
perhaps this signals such a driver size/distance/angle problem because as as el`Ol noted:
as to the
undeline mine
well, this was exactly the problem I had with it, on most recordings it sounded good but with some it failed miserably, strange things going on or just no soundstage at all, complete collapse
exactly therefore I kept looking for another solution, inventing this flooder thing eventually which turned out to be the setup that is most versatile/tolerant to worse (space-wise) recordings while not losing the natural spaciousness
but there is more than just flooder/stereolit alternative, there is also this slanted flooder/Carlsson thing, fortunately el`Ol tested all three setups plus an ambiopole, here are His summary obervations (CFS is for a flooder):
ps.
for all those with search function off
here is how a slanted Carlsson looks alike in a manufacturer recommended positioning - I mean the one with wood veneer of course An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
CFS = a ceiling firing system = a flooder (pure, straight as opposed to slanted flooders of Carlsson)
both names courtesy of el`Ol
what a flooder is was explained in this thread in one of my posts, with photos of examples of implementation of the principle
posts #1309-1310
Last edited:
here is how a slanted Carlsson looks alike in a manufacturer recommended positioning - I mean the one with wood veneer of course
oops, sth wrong with the picture sometimes, here is another one (the shorter one, light veneer):
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.