| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Woofers: Does size matter?
"Tom1W" wrote in message ... I would like to pose a question to those who understand speaker technology: Why is it that we do not see as many loudspeakers these days with woofers beyond 6" to 8". I recall many years ago, that more "serious" loudspeakers were sold with at least 10" woofers and some even as large as 15". Is a large woofer needed to evenly and to accurately and loudly enough present the lowest bass tones or has technology changed where size does not matter? Size does matter when it comes to moving more air and when it comes to deep bass at high spl with lower distortion. The smaller drivers don't get as low or as loud as loud. They simply take up less space which for many people is an important criteria. If the space is small, as in a car, you can take advantage of room gain to get bass re-enforcement, but as the space get larger, the driver must also. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tom1W" wrote in message ... : I would like to pose a question to those who understand speaker technology: Why : is it that we do not see as many loudspeakers these days with woofers beyond 6" : to 8". I recall many years ago, that more "serious" loudspeakers were sold with : at least 10" woofers and some even as large as 15". Is a large woofer needed to : evenly and to accurately and loudly enough present the lowest bass tones or has : technology changed where size does not matter? Use the simple analogy of a engine cilinder. you want to create volume, so it's long throw, narrow cilinder or wide cilinder, short stroke long throw will have it's problems, eg. you need a long, homogenous magnetic field for the voicecoil to move within using a large area has problems like conus break-up and mass-to-move it's really a matter of cost (magnetics, conus material, accurate line-up, etc.) Eg. check out Volt drivers  Rudy |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
: Eg. check out Volt drivers : Rudy : model RV4504: 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm 750 W with 50 mm excursion... that' ll shake your fishes :-) R. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ruud Broens" wrote in message ... : : : : Eg. check out Volt drivers : : Rudy : : : model RV4504: : 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm : 750 W with 50 mm excursion... : that' ll shake your fishes :-) : R. That would be the long *and* wide version. nice one for a mfb system. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ruud Broens" said:
: Eg. check out Volt drivers model RV4504: 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm 750 W with 50 mm excursion... that' ll shake your fishes :-) Don't believe a women who says size doesn't matter. BTW many small drivers, isn't that a good idea? Dr. Amar? Are you there? -- Sander de Waal " SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. " |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ruud Broens" wrote in message ... : : "Ruud Broens" wrote in message : ... : : : : : : : Eg. check out Volt drivers : : : Rudy : : : : : model RV4504: : : 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm : : 750 W with 50 mm excursion... : : that' ll shake your fishes :-) : : R. : : That would be the long *and* wide version. : : nice one for a mfb system. : Hm, maybe Steward can come up with a 1 KW bridged amp. let's see...transducers for the mfb.. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... : Ruud Broens wrote:" : : : Eg. check out Volt drivers : : Rudy : : : model RV4504: : 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm : 750 W with 50 mm excursion... : that' ll shake your fishes :-) : R. : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in the ocean". :  : : : Bruce J. Richman : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway Rudy |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ruud Broens wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... : Ruud Broens wrote:" : : : Eg. check out Volt drivers : : Rudy : : : model RV4504: : 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm : 750 W with 50 mm excursion... : that' ll shake your fishes :-) : R. : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in the ocean". : : : : Bruce J. Richman : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway Rudy One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some of which is psychogenic. Bruce J. Richman |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... : Ruud Broens wrote: : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in the : ocean". : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway : Rudy : : : : One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some of which : is psychogenic. : : : : Bruce J. Richman : Is there gene therapy research going on in that area ? R. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... : Raul Broens wrote: : : : "Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message : ... : : Ruud Broens wrote: : : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in the : : ocean". : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway : : Rudy : : : : : : : : One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some of : which : : is psychogenic. : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : Is there gene therapy research going on in that area ? : R. : : : : I would tend to doubt it, since most sexual dysfunction problems are, as far as : we know, not congenital. Obviously, some have a biiological basis, some are : caused by medication side effects (e.g. antihypertensive and cardiac : medications), and some are purely psychogenic, involving performance anxiety, : phobic fears, depression, etc. : : : : Bruce J. Richman : Yeah, better add the anti-depress. to the list, too Rudy: |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Raul Broens wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... : Raul Broens wrote: : : : "Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message : ... : : Ruud Broens wrote: : : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in the : : ocean". : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway : : Rudy : : : : : : : : One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some of : which : : is psychogenic. : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : Is there gene therapy research going on in that area ? : R. : : : : I would tend to doubt it, since most sexual dysfunction problems are, as far as : we know, not congenital. Obviously, some have a biiological basis, some are : caused by medication side effects (e.g. antihypertensive and cardiac : medications), and some are purely psychogenic, involving performance anxiety, : phobic fears, depression, etc. : : : : Bruce J. Richman : Yeah, better add the anti-depress. to the list, too Rudy: Very true. Bruce J. Richman |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
: : "Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
: : ... : : : Ruud Broens wrote: : : : : : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in : the : : : ocean". : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : : : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway : : : Rudy : : : : : : : : : : : : One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some : of : : which : : : is psychogenic. : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : Is there gene therapy research going on in that area ? : : R. : : : : : : : : I would tend to doubt it, since most sexual dysfunction problems are, as : far as : : we know, not congenital. Obviously, some have a biiological basis, some : are : : caused by medication side effects (e.g. antihypertensive and cardiac : : medications), and some are purely psychogenic, involving performance : anxiety, : : phobic fears, depression, etc. : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : Yeah, better add the anti-depress. to the list, too : Rudy: : : : : Very true. : : : : Bruce J. Richman Think this is sufficient to shut up mr. macmacKellewhy ?Rudy |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Raul Broens wrote:
: : "Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message : : ... : : : Ruud Broens wrote: : : : : : : : : : : Confucious say, "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion in : the : : : ocean". : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : : : Hm, had'nt thought of it, thattaway : : : Rudy : : : : : : : : : : : : One of the problems I treat in my practice is sexual dysfunction, some : of : : which : : : is psychogenic. : : : : : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : : : Is there gene therapy research going on in that area ? : : R. : : : : : : : : I would tend to doubt it, since most sexual dysfunction problems are, as : far as : : we know, not congenital. Obviously, some have a biiological basis, some : are : : caused by medication side effects (e.g. antihypertensive and cardiac : : medications), and some are purely psychogenic, involving performance : anxiety, : : phobic fears, depression, etc. : : : : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : : : Yeah, better add the anti-depress. to the list, too : Rudy: : : : : Very true. : : : : Bruce J. Richman Think this is sufficient to shut up mr. macmacKellewhy ?Rudy LOL !!!! No, he's been making a fool of himself for many years with his idiotic lies and libelous false claims. He probably thinks that I've made up all this factual information about psychopathology, treatment methods, psychotropic medications, etc. There is no reason on earth why anybody should believe that he's telling the truth now any more than he has in the past. Bruce J. Richman |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
: : Bruce J. Richman : : Think this is sufficient to shut up mr. macmacKellewhy ?: Rudy : : : : LOL !!!! : : No, he's been making a fool of himself for many years with his idiotic lies : and libelous false claims. : : He probably thinks that I've made up all this factual information about : psychopathology, treatment methods, psychotropic medications, etc. : : There is no reason on earth why anybody should believe that he's telling the : truth now any more than he has in the past. : : : : : Bruce J. Richman : ......it's a bit cooled down, at the Kelvin front R. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
: : : model RV4504:
: : : 96 db SPL, 1W/1m 460mm : : : 750 W with 50 mm excursion... : : : that' ll shake your fishes :-) : : : : That would be the long *and* wide version. : : : : nice one for a mfb system. : : : Hm, maybe Steward can come up with a 1 KW bridged amp. : let's see...transducers for the mfb.. : Guess Stewart Pinkerton is off to Chavez' land.. l8er, maybe ? : : : R. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tom1W" wrote in message ... I would like to pose a question to those who understand speaker technology: Why is it that we do not see as many loudspeakers these days with woofers beyond 6" to 8". I recall many years ago, that more "serious" loudspeakers were sold with at least 10" woofers and some even as large as 15". Is a large woofer needed to evenly and to accurately and loudly enough present the lowest bass tones or has technology changed where size does not matter? Size matters--a lot! Indeed, some people will not buy a speaker large enough to hold a 12" woofer. They simply don't want such a thing in their living room. As a result, most speaker manufacturers have chosen to make their product with a small woofer having a longer excursion. If the bass is still insufficient, you're supposed to add a subwoofer which, while large, at least can be tucked away in the corner behind some piece of furniture. Small boxes are also cheaper to ship, an important factor in low priced speakers. Merry Xmas, Norm Strong |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tom1W" wrote in message ... I would like to pose a question to those who understand speaker technology: Why is it that we do not see as many loudspeakers these days with woofers beyond 6" to 8". I recall many years ago, that more "serious" loudspeakers were sold with at least 10" woofers and some even as large as 15". Is a large woofer needed to evenly and to accurately and loudly enough present the lowest bass tones or has technology changed where size does not matter? As others have mentioned, it's partly a matter of size of the enclosure. However, large woofers can fit in very compact enclosures. Acoustic Research (AR) did this for years, with very impressive results. The AR-58BXJ is one of the smallest full range loudspeakers ever made. Compact designs that use large woofers are usually based on the acoustic suspension principle. Although speaker designers generally swear by acoustic suspension as providing the highest quality bass, it is a low efficiency system. In the past, there was a market for high performance, low efficiency speakers, for use in conjunction with powerful basic amplifiers. However, with the advent of home theater, the basic amplifier is no longer a mainstream item. Home theater receivers are not capable of powering acoustic suspension designs to expected volume levels. Consequently, there has been a replacement of large-woofer acoustic suspension designs with ported designs using lighter cones and smaller magnet structures that can be driven by typical home theater speakers. However, these designs tend to exhibit large phase anomalies, as well as an inevitably steep rolloff of bass below the design corner frequency. They don't produce bass of the same quality, but people don't seem to care these days. It is possible to build ported systems that use large woofers, but tuning requirements result in large cabinet volume, larger than is accepted by most buyers today. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Morein (fils):
Compact designs that use large woofers are usually based on the acoustic suspension principle. Although speaker designers generally swear by acoustic suspension as providing the highest quality bass, it is a low efficiency system. In the past, there was a market for high performance, low efficiency speakers, for use in conjunction with powerful basic amplifiers. However, with the advent of home theater, the basic amplifier is no longer a mainstream item. Home theater receivers are not capable of powering acoustic suspension designs to expected volume levels. Consequently, there has been a replacement of large-woofer acoustic suspension designs with ported designs using lighter cones and smaller magnet structures that can be driven by typical home theater speakers. However, these designs tend to exhibit large phase anomalies, as well as an inevitably steep rolloff of bass below the design corner frequency. They don't produce bass of the same quality, but people don't seem to care these days. It is possible to build ported systems that use large woofers, but tuning requirements result in large cabinet volume, larger than is accepted by most buyers today. Generally the active sub has been used in lieu of the really-full-range speaker in mid-fi and middlefi systems, both 5.1 and 2.1. For aficionados of the "full range driver" this is also helpful. But the home theater receiver is not really taken that seriously by anyone, and so, I would posit that the fully active biamped or triamped speaker is a much better way to go in the solid state era. For any number of channels. Because no passive crossover is used, you save a lot of heft and power on lack of insertion loss alone. Genelec and other brands preferred by mixdown and mastering facilities are perhaps best. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Morein (fils): Compact designs that use large woofers are usually based on the acoustic suspension principle. Although speaker designers generally swear by acoustic suspension as providing the highest quality bass, it is a low efficiency system. In the past, there was a market for high performance, low efficiency speakers, for use in conjunction with powerful basic amplifiers. However, with the advent of home theater, the basic amplifier is no longer a mainstream item. Home theater receivers are not capable of powering acoustic suspension designs to expected volume levels. Consequently, there has been a replacement of large-woofer acoustic suspension designs with ported designs using lighter cones and smaller magnet structures that can be driven by typical home theater speakers. However, these designs tend to exhibit large phase anomalies, as well as an inevitably steep rolloff of bass below the design corner frequency. They don't produce bass of the same quality, but people don't seem to care these days. It is possible to build ported systems that use large woofers, but tuning requirements result in large cabinet volume, larger than is accepted by most buyers today. Generally the active sub has been used in lieu of the really-full-range speaker in mid-fi and middlefi systems, both 5.1 and 2.1. For aficionados of the "full range driver" this is also helpful. But the home theater receiver is not really taken that seriously by anyone, and so, I would posit that the fully active biamped or triamped speaker is a much better way to go in the solid state era. For any number of channels. Because no passive crossover is used, you save a lot of heft and power on lack of insertion loss alone. Genelec and other brands preferred by mixdown and mastering facilities are perhaps best. I would agree that in principle, a speaker is best driven by matched electronics, and that could be realized in the form of active loudspeakers. However, that does not mean that an active loudspeaker is a good one. A loudspeaker intended for nearfield mixdown is not apriori optimal, either for one's listening setup, or one's personal taste. Mixdown loudspeakers have characteristics that appeal to professionals who want a standardized rendition that results in a mixdown compatible across a wide range of enduser systems. Consequently, they abjure many of the tricks of sonic aesthetics that endear many individualistic loudspeakers to the audiophile listening audience. There are scientific standards for measuring the sensations of sweet, tart, salt, and bitter, but there is no scientific standard for the quality of wine. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Robert Morein wrote:
There are scientific standards for measuring the sensations of sweet, tart, salt, and bitter, but there is no scientific standard for the quality of wine. You are right. George M. Middius, himself (lol), uses the "overwhelming consensus". Few times ago he wrote: "And I didn't "criticize" Corbieres, I commented on it. And my comments reflected the overwhelming consensus of the opinions of wine connoisseurs." George Middius "comment" on a wine that he has never tasted writing : "That's a prole's choice. Always has been, always will be". Note that I have nothing against such behaviour, Middius and the stupid snob like him provide a substential France substential incomes. ;-) There's a very interesting scientific essai directed by a french sociologist which compares wine and music. It would bring a lot of matter to the discussion about DBT since an important chapter is dedicated to a comparison between DBT test applied to wine and music. The conclusion is that, in most of case, DBT distorts the results of tasting in general. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
There are active monitors for nearfield and for full field use. Of the latter, you may audition them to see if they are to your "taste", but if you want to listen to the music as its producers intended using the speaker they mixed down on is usually the closest way to go. On the other hand if you want "my-fi", as long as you are honest get whatever you want. Active speakers are the best way to deploy Class B solid state amplifier technology. Class A may be used in the tweeter driver PA at a minimal increase in the thermal and power budget, as well. Provided that the customer (not the "consumer") has confidence in the manufacturing consistency of the prime vendor, this allows channel expansion in the most cost effective manner possible. Start with two, go to 3, then add two more, then add two more. Provided that the listening /viewing room is wired intelligently, which is cost-effective compared to high dollar speaker cables of dubious efficacy, expansion is extremely simple. The room should be prewired for 600 ohm balanced analog or AES/EBU digital, 100baseT/MaGIC, and four conductor 230/115 AC, with a common and very low impedance earth ground. Developing and getting NEC approval for a standard wall plate and box would go a long way here. |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... There are active monitors for nearfield and for full field use. Of the latter, you may audition them to see if they are to your "taste", but if you want to listen to the music as its producers intended using the speaker they mixed down on is usually the closest way to go. On the other hand if you want "my-fi", as long as you are honest get whatever you want. The producers did not intend that you hear the sound the way it was mixed down. The mix is always a compromise, and monitors are made for best judgment of that compromise, not listening pleasure. I do not believe that the best speakers today are active loudspeakers. The principle of combining speaker and amplification is a good one, but it implies nothing about the result. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lionel" wrote in message ... Robert Morein wrote: There are scientific standards for measuring the sensations of sweet, tart, salt, and bitter, but there is no scientific standard for the quality of wine. You are right. George M. Middius, himself (lol), uses the "overwhelming consensus". Few times ago he wrote: "And I didn't "criticize" Corbieres, I commented on it. And my comments reflected the overwhelming consensus of the opinions of wine connoisseurs." George Middius "comment" on a wine that he has never tasted writing : "That's a prole's choice. Always has been, always will be". Note that I have nothing against such behaviour, Middius and the stupid snob like him provide a substential France substential incomes. ;-) There's a very interesting scientific essai directed by a french sociologist which compares wine and music. Available in translation? |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
a thick bed of onions,
celery, green onions, and parsley. Place roast on top with fat side up. Place uncovered in 500° oven for 20 minutes, reduce oven to 325°. Bake till medium rare (150°) and let roast rest. Pour stock over onions and drippings, carve the meat and place the slices in the au jus. Bisque à l?Enfant Honor the memory of Grandma with this dish by utilizing her good silver soup tureen and her great grandchildren (crawfish, crab or lobster will work just as well, however this dish is classically made with crawfish). Stuffed infant heads, stuffed crawfish heads, stuffed crab or lobster shells; make patties if shell or head is not available (such as with packaged crawfish, crab, or headless baby). Flour oil onions bell peppers garlic salt, pepper, etc. 3 cups chicken stock 2 sticks butter 3 tablespoons oil First stuff the heads, or make the patties (see index) then fry or bake. Set aside to drain on paper towels. Make a roux with butter, oil and flour, brown vegetables in the roux, then add chic |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
quality marinade (Teriyaki and garlic perhaps)
1 inch cubes of tender meat, preferably from the nursery Onions bell peppers Wooden or metal skewers Marinate the meat overnight. Get the grill good and hot while placing meat, vegetables, and fruit such as pineapples or cherries on the skewers. Don?t be afraid to use a variety of meats. Grill to medium rare, serve with garlic cous-cous and sautéed asparagus. Coffee and sherbet for desert then walnuts, cheese, and port. Cigars for the gentlemen (and ladies if they so desire)! Crock-Pot Crack Baby When the quivering, hopelessly addicted crack baby succumbs to death, get him immediately butchered and into the crock-pot, so that any remaining toxins will not be fatal. But don?t cook it too long, because like Blowfish, there is a perfect medium between the poisonous and the stimulating. Though it may not have the same effect on your guests, a whole chicken cooked in this fashion is also mighty tasty. 1 newborn - cocaine addicted, freshly expired, cleaned and butchered Carrots onions leeks celery bell pepper potatoes Salt pepper garlic, etc 4 cups water Cut the meat into natural pieces and brown very well in olive oil, remove, then brown half of the onions, the bell pepper, and celery |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tom1W wrote:
I would like to pose a question to those who understand speaker technology: Why is it that we do not see as many loudspeakers these days with woofers beyond 6" to 8". I recall many years ago, that more "serious" loudspeakers were sold with at least 10" woofers and some even as large as 15". Is a large woofer needed to evenly and to accurately and loudly enough present the lowest bass tones or has technology changed where size does not matter? You can get pretty low and clean with bass systems making use of drivers as small as 8 inches across. A good example is the Hsu STF-1 subwoofer. Another is the Eminent Technology LFT-8 full-range system or any number of Allison full-range designs of years past. However, to get really low and loud you either need a big driver (Velodyne 15- and 18-inch driver servo jobs, or the Paradigm 15-inch servo, usually in fairly large enclosures) or a fairly big woofer driver in a pretty big enclosure (Hsu and SVS reflex subs, with 10- and 12-inch drivers). The name of the game is moving air, and to do that you have to employ drivers and/or enclosures that will do just that. There are some small units out there that will go pretty low and loud (smaller Velodyne servo units, and the Sunfire line), but they often involve tradeoffs that center on clean output limits or distortion levels at high outputs. PS: I have reviewed a number of models from the above-mentioned companies for The Sensible Sound. Howard Ferstler |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Robert Morein wrote:
Consequently, there has been a replacement of large-woofer acoustic suspension designs with ported designs using lighter cones and smaller magnet structures that can be driven by typical home theater speakers. However, these designs tend to exhibit large phase anomalies, as well as an inevitably steep rolloff of bass below the design corner frequency. They don't produce bass of the same quality, but people don't seem to care these days. Few people were bigger fans of AR than I was during its heyday. I cut my teeth on the philosophies of Ed Villchur, Henry Kloss, and Roy Allison. (Allison remains a good friend of mine, and the speakers in the largest of my three AV systems are all Allison models.) However, I will have to defend the ported-woofer contingent at this time. I have reviewed some superb ported subwoofer designs by Hsu and SVS and must say that although with special test tones they were very slightly outpointed by some of the servo-controlled acoustic-suspension subwoofers I have also reviewed (by Velodyne and Paradigm, mainly), with music all bets were off. The big Hsu and SVS subs I have reviewed have been able to hold their own with the very best acoustic-suspension subwoofers, even fine servo jobs. Admittedly, with full-range systems I have had better luck with acoustic-suspension woofer systems than I have with ported versions, but with ultimate-design woofer systems (subwoofers) the ported jobs were often able to hold their own with the best right down into the bass-range cellar. It is possible to build ported systems that use large woofers, but tuning requirements result in large cabinet volume, larger than is accepted by most buyers today. I agree, although compared to the larger Velodyne and Paradigm subs, the woofers drivers in the better ported subs are not all that large. The enclosures are often large, however, although subs like the Hsu VTF-2 or the SVS 25-31 are not all that huge and they can match the low-bass performance of just about any full-range system that employs the acoustic-suspension design. They can also match the performance of usually much more expensive acoustic-suspension subs of similar size, at least down to about 25 Hz. Above that frequency they can often play louder than the AS units, which gives them an edge with most music and movies in larger rooms. Howard Ferstler |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
The only "gold standard" is a minimally miked pure acoustic
performance-or other sound source, i.e. steam trains, et al-versus actually listening to the source. When getting to reproducing popular music recorded out of real time, multitrack, in various rooms, et al it realy comes down to "my-fi" anyway. So if you think putting a 147 Leslie in each corner of your living room is the best way to listen to your records, that's your opinion. It has no less nor more objective validity than that of The Absolute Sound or Stereophile. If you want to hear it as close as they did in the studio at final mixdown-an admittedly arbitrary goal, but a useful "secondary standard"- using the same speakers and amps they did is usually a good way to get you in the ballpark. When I listen to pop music for fun, I use EQ anyway-not consumer bass and treble cut but a discrete SS based graphic EQ. I'd buy a Manley Massive Passive but the price is ridiculous, so I put up with what I have. In general I think tube amps with moderate feedback or solid state amps with a Class A power point "as loud as you can stand" are superior to the Lin/Slone/Kruger/Aczel-Rich approved Class B solid state amp. My preference. The best way to use a Class B amplifier is to have its signal correctly phased and drive a cone directly without a crossover in between. I believe active speakers are best for most people who are not hard core audiophiles, you plug them in they work. |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ups.com... The only "gold standard" is a minimally miked pure acoustic performance-or other sound source, i.e. steam trains, et al-versus actually listening to the source. When getting to reproducing popular music recorded out of real time, multitrack, in various rooms, et al it realy comes down to "my-fi" anyway. So if you think putting a 147 Leslie in each corner of your living room is the best way to listen to your records, that's your opinion. It has no less nor more objective validity than that of The Absolute Sound or Stereophile. If you want to hear it as close as they did in the studio at final mixdown-an admittedly arbitrary goal, but a useful "secondary standard"- using the same speakers and amps they did is usually a good way to get you in the ballpark. When I listen to pop music for fun, I use EQ anyway-not consumer bass and treble cut but a discrete SS based graphic EQ. I'd buy a Manley Massive Passive but the price is ridiculous, so I put up with what I have. In general I think tube amps with moderate feedback or solid state amps with a Class A power point "as loud as you can stand" are superior to the Lin/Slone/Kruger/Aczel-Rich approved Class B solid state amp. My preference. The best way to use a Class B amplifier is to have its signal correctly phased and drive a cone directly without a crossover in between. I believe active speakers are best for most people who are not hard core audiophiles, you plug them in they work. I don't find anything you say outrageous. But although the principle is a good one, with all the mistakes one can make designing loudspeakers, it doesn't appear that active designs are much more likely to please. I have found a number of people who are natural audiophiles, meaning they don't listen alot, but they know what they like. They can be much pickier about the voice of a speaker than I've expected. As for the hoi poloi, you could give them anything. The problem with actives: Electronic circuitry does degrade from vibration. Solder joints crack, capacitors leak, wirebonds in transistors in ICs break. When the circuitry is installed in the speaker cabinet, it is subject to far more vibration than if at a remote location. While passive speakers are among the most reliable components, combination with active circuitry may result in a product that is less reliable than the component parts. It is my personal preference to optimize the environment of the electronics. The ability to swap out a defective amplifier is also a plus. When an active goes bad, you either have to ship a bulky box, or obtain permission to remove the active circuitry, while storing a useless speaker, perhaps for a while, until the circuitry is returned. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
You have some good points, although most actives mount the electronics
on an aft slab of milled heat sink, and if they are designed properly (look, carefully, at 70s and 80s Motorola solid state RF sections) they will take a pounding. Genelecs have been running two and three shifts for fifteen years now with good reliability. As for service, the elegant thing would be the user calls the company and they ship out a tested refurb and you swap them out, returning the failed unit. I understand Genelec will do just this for credible in warranty failures. However, one alternative would be a multiple channel amp with dissimilar sections and a proprietary cable, containing the crossover and multiple power amp sections. While this would result in potentially cooler operation, it negates the ease of use of active speakers. I think active speakers will appeal most strongly to the "I don't know audio but I know good sound when i hear it" crowd, when properly marketed. Frank Zappa used to put on the dust jacket that they used a certain JBL monitor (not active) and that was the most accurate for that record and indeed pro outlets sold them to home user Zappa fans for several years. |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Robert Morein" wrote in message ... snipped 4 brevety While passive speakers are : among the most reliable components, combination with active circuitry may : result in a product that is less reliable than the component parts. Say, what ?? that's entirely based on your assumption, an active system setup *has* to be mechanically integrated, eh ? good post, Robert Rudy |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
In light of what Mr. Ferstler wrote here, I wonder how the highly praised
Eminent Technology EMT-VIIIa speaker, which employs a 1400 cu.in. acoustic suspension enclosure to hold a custom designed 8" (eight) woofer, can achieve such excellent bass response results? It would seem to me that a 1400 cu.in. enclosure is really quite small, and without the help of a port to reinforce the sound, what is the "secret" behind the speaker's excellent performance? |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article .net,
"Peter" wrote: In light of what Mr. Ferstler wrote here, I wonder how the highly praised Eminent Technology EMT-VIIIa speaker, which employs a 1400 cu.in. acoustic suspension enclosure to hold a custom designed 8" (eight) woofer, can achieve such excellent bass response results? It would seem to me that a 1400 cu.in. enclosure is really quite small, and without the help of a port to reinforce the sound, what is the "secret" behind the speaker's excellent performance? Acoustic suspension? Stephen |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
MINe 109 wrote:
In light of what Mr. Ferstler wrote here, I wonder how the highly praised Eminent Technology EMT-VIIIa speaker, which employs a 1400 cu.in. acoustic suspension enclosure to hold a custom designed 8" (eight) woofer, can achieve such excellent bass response results? It would seem to me that a 1400 cu.in. enclosure is really quite small, and without the help of a port to reinforce the sound, what is the "secret" behind the speaker's excellent performance? Acoustic suspension? It just means that the box is too small. Whether it actually is depends on the T-S parameters of the driver. -- Eiron. |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
In general, while the modern bookshelf/subwoofer combo can deliver more
bass energy than classic designs, the classic drivers with large cones-particularly the 15" coax drivers in suitable boxes- gave a more natural sound presentation in many cases. There are two reasons for the modern trend, SAF-or spousal acceptance factor-and build cost. Unless one is an aficionado of pipe organ music, the lowest frequency of substantial musical interest is probably 30.87 Hz. This is the low B string on the five string electric bass. While most of the classic designs had little output even at 55 Hz-the frequency of the A string of the bass-any working bass player of the era will attest to the "kick-ass sound" of their bass lines through the old Altec green boxes in playback. Objective measurements aside, the big high build cost drivers such as the Altec 604 and others provide (present tense!) a listening experience very difficult to emulate with small speakers and a sub. Generally, small speakers have a pleasing midrange and lack drive in the lower registers. A 12-inch woofer is probably the smallest that can be taken seriously for good baritone and upper bass performance under any circumstances. Were it not so, the single driver solutions such as Lowthers would be taken more seriously than they are-and, outside such cabinetry as Mr. Pass's "J-Low", they aren't. Small box speakers that are not optimized for nearfield use (and used accordingly) are a limited proposition and should be presented with that in mind. If one is limited in space, one may do the best he can, but even after sixty years of development, in speakers as in engines, "There is No Replacement For Displacement". High end saloons selling ridiculous speakers with small drivers and byzantine crossovers, such as Thiel, know better, but if the customer base is that gullible, figure they are giving the customer a benefit in allowing the client to have "spousal acceptance" to the wife and "mine's bigger" to the client's male 'friends' simultaneously. |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
In general, while the modern bookshelf/subwoofer combo can deliver more
bass energy than classic designs, the classic drivers with large cones-particularly the 15" coax drivers in suitable boxes- gave a more natural sound presentation in many cases. There are two reasons for the modern trend, SAF-or spousal acceptance factor-and build cost. Unless one is an aficionado of pipe organ music, the lowest frequency of substantial musical interest is probably 30.87 Hz. This is the low B string on the five string electric bass. While most of the classic designs had little output even at 55 Hz-the frequency of the A string of the bass-any working bass player of the era will attest to the "kick-ass sound" of their bass lines through the old Altec green boxes in playback. Objective measurements aside, the big high build cost drivers such as the Altec 604 and others provide (present tense!) a listening experience very difficult to emulate with small speakers and a sub. Generally, small speakers have a pleasing midrange and lack drive in the lower registers. A 12-inch woofer is probably the smallest that can be taken seriously for good baritone and upper bass performance under any circumstances. Were it not so, the single driver solutions such as Lowthers would be taken more seriously than they are-and, outside such cabinetry as Mr. Pass's "J-Low", they aren't. Small box speakers that are not optimized for nearfield use (and used accordingly) are a limited proposition and should be presented with that in mind. If one is limited in space, one may do the best he can, but even after sixty years of development, in speakers as in engines, "There is No Replacement For Displacement". High end saloons selling ridiculous speakers with small drivers and byzantine crossovers, such as Thiel, know better, but if the customer base is that gullible, figure they are giving the customer a benefit in allowing the client to have "spousal acceptance" to the wife and "mine's bigger" to the client's male 'friends' simultaneously. |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter wrote:
In light of what Mr. Ferstler wrote here, I wonder how the highly praised Eminent Technology EMT-VIIIa speaker, which employs a 1400 cu.in. acoustic suspension enclosure to hold a custom designed 8" (eight) woofer, can achieve such excellent bass response results? It would seem to me that a 1400 cu.in. enclosure is really quite small, and without the help of a port to reinforce the sound, what is the "secret" behind the speaker's excellent performance? The LFT-8 system has an excellent bass driver (made by Eminence, I think) and the result is classic acoustic-suspension performance. In my main listening room they sounded very clean and strong right down to 30 Hz, and even at 25 Hz they did good work. I reviewed the system in issue 94 of The Sensible Sound and found it to be really quite good in all respects, although it rolls off above 8 kHz faster than some might like. (Even the company's own printed response curve shows this.) The bass section (both systems in operation, measured in my main listening room at a standard location) could cleanly hit 100 dB at 31.5 Hz and 90 dB at 20 Hz. As points of reference, a Hsu VTF-2 subwoofer could hit 106 and 90, respectively, a pair of Dunlavy Cantatas could hit 102 and 100, and a pair of Polk LSi25 systems could hit 101 and 83. The full-range systems were considerably more expensive and all had larger woofers than the ET system, but they sounded no cleaner within the bass range it could handle. Indeed, the ET system was easily superior to the more expensive Polks down really low. Of course, if one wants serious subwoofer work they should consider something like a Hsu TN1220 (a clean 113 dB at 31.5 Hz and 106 dB at 20 Hz), Paradigm Servo 15 (112 and 110), SVS PC Ultra (114 and 106), or Velodyne F1800RII (114 and 110, with the later HGS-18 model probably being even better). I have reviewed a fair number of other subwoofers and full-range systems for The Sensible Sound and Audiophile Voice, with some being outstanding and others being just so so, and the ET model was able to hold its own in the bass range with some really fine hardware. It is a very fine speaker system. Howard Ferstler |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
With all due respect, as Mr. Ferstler probably heard the early AR
speakers before I heard anything at all-they were out in the Jack Pack days and I'm a mid'63 model- the AR speakers were generally referred to as "Boston Bland". You see a lot of pictures of everyone from Sinatra to the Shirelles around the big green boxed 15" Altecs, but never an AR. AR (Acoustic Research, as opposed to the later Audio Research Corp which is usually 'ARC') was the first with the foam surround small box speaker as well as a turntable that was simply designed but not too sophisticated in construction (Ivor Tiefenbrun at Linn made a high-end empire from a blueprinted copy). The AR speakers were okay for their size but not serious competitors for such icons of vintage design as the Klipschhorn and LaScala, and other sizable Altec and JBL systems. Old AR speakers I have heard seem to earn their sobriquet well, but they are as old as I am, save for the replaced foam surrounds. In general, 3 way systems IMO have byzantine crossovers and, in my opinion, passive crossovers are the weak link in almost all audio. Active 3 way systems may well be great but otherwise a 2-way is usually preferable from that standpoint alone. I note that really baroque affairs from McIntosh and Legacy have been out for years. No one mixes down or masters on them (and I am only speaking of that small segment who don't do everything midfield with Yamahas on the meter bridge-boy does that suck!) As for the Hsu subs, I believe they are derived from a design published in Speaker Builder, using Sonotubes intended as concrete column molds, and intended for bass players. if I am mistaken please let me know. That doesn't make them bad, it does mean credit should be given to the concept originator. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Powerful Argument in Favor of Agnosticism and Athetism | Audio Opinions | |||
| FS: Vintage ADVENT, KLH & EPI WOOFERS & TWEETERS ! | Marketplace | |||
| FS: Vintage ADVENT, KLH & EPI WOOFERS & TWEETERS ! | Marketplace | |||
| "The fact of the matter is..." | Audio Opinions | |||
| Boston Acoustics A60 II: Replacement or Retrofit Woofers ? | Tech | |||
Linear Mode
