List of wide dispersion speakers for people worried about sweetspots....... [Text View]

ssabripo

07-03-07, 09:47 PM

Why B&W and not Mirage? Mirage should have nearly perfect 180 degree soundfield if their design is doing what I think. FST B&Ws have very erratic dispersion that would preclude them from the listen almost automatically. They're very sensitive to seating position. Not sure about the VS or Avalons.
easy: Mirage's drivers are horrid in horizontal dispertion, and I have no idea why are are pulling the "they have nearly perfect 180deg soundfield" nonesense from :confused:

if you could post a link to a nearfield measurement, I woud love to see it ;)

And once again, you just pull a statement out of the blue with your "B&W have very erratic disperson" nonesense.....If you can pull a link or measurement, I would LOVE to see it.

Secondly, I highly encourage you to grab a pair of VS VR9SE's, some Avalon Eidolons, a pair of 800s/802s, and your favorite one from the list you posted, and do a blind listening test with them and tell me which one has the worst dispersion.

shouldn't be too hard for you with all your connections and networking, right?

Alimentall

07-03-07, 10:14 PM

easy: Mirage's drivers are horrid in horizontal dispertion, and I have no idea why are are pulling the "they have nearly perfect 180deg soundfield" nonesense from :confused:

I just looked up two new Mirages at www.speakermeasurements.com and they have exceptional off axis dispersion. Now, the FR would be bad enough to keep it from being called "high-end", but they *obviously* have very wide dispersion.

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/mirage_omni60/frequency_456075.gif

Mirage Omni 60 ^

And once again, you just pull a statement out of the blue with your "B&W have very erratic disperson" nonesense.....If you can pull a link or measurement, I would LOVE to see it.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/bw_cm1/frequency_456075.gif

B&W CM1 ^

I could pull out stuff like that all day long if you like! 705s have good dispersion, but the FST driver in the 802D does not. It drops off fast, then flares out near 75-90 degrees. I've listened to lots of B&Ws and sweetspot is not their strong point.

Secondly, I highly encourage you to grab a pair of VS VR9SE's, some Avalon Eidolons, a pair of 800s/802s, and your favorite one from the list you posted, and do a blind listening test with them and tell me which one has the worst dispersion.

If you're implying that VR9s and Avalons are no better, that kinda disqualifies them, now doesn't it?

http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1205802fig5.jpg

B&W 802D ^

http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1106NC3fig5.jpg

$800/pr speaker ^

ssabripo

07-03-07, 10:37 PM

I just looked up two new Mirages at www.speakermeasurements.com and they have exceptional off axis dispersion. Now, the FR would be bad enough to keep it from being called "high-end", but they *obviously* have very wide dispersion.

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/mirage_omni60/frequency_456075.gif

Mirage Omni 60 ^

lol....you HAVE to be joking, right? I've usually had the same viewpoints with you, but are you telling me that the mirage Omni makes your list? :eek:

no seriously. here is its 180 deg dispersion as per your link:
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/mirage_omni60/deviation_180.gif

too bad it doesn't show the angle axis, but we both know its pretty awful. The FR alone is something to cringe at.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/bw_cm1/frequency_456075.gif
B&W CM1 ^

I could pull out stuff like that all day long if you like! 705s have good dispersion, but the FST driver in the 802D does not. It drops off fast, then flares out near 75-90 degrees. I've listened to lots of B&Ws and sweetspot is not their strong point.
of course you can.....its your way of manipulating the conversation into making the Nautilus line look however you want to potray it. Too the soundstage links didn't have a nautilus line to show off, or it would make your point null ;)

If you're implying that VR9s and Avalons are no better, that kinda disqualifies them, now doesn't it?
who implied that? Have you even heard a pair of Avalon Eidolons? they make your belove NHT XD's look like Computer speakers in comparison in not only dispersion, but depth, imaging, and soundstage. Like I said, you should really get a pair, and do a blind listening test. I'm sure a lot of your preconcieved ideas will be changed in a hurry.

http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1205802fig5.jpg

B&W 802D ^

http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1106NC3fig5.jpg

$800/pr speaker ^
care to show the same for the mirage? how about the NHT? oh, and I would LOVE to see the full link.

now I have agreed with you, that the Nautilus line has some major deficiencies, such as the use of the Kevlar cone, the 4K XO point, and a few others.....no doubt these need to be addressed and are taking away from it can be.

Nevertheless, for the purpose of this thread, their dispertion is KNOWN for being extremely wide:
http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/921/index2.html
GUBe steers an attractive middle road somewhere between such wide-dispersion designs as B&W's Nautilus series, with their separate mid and treble enclosures, and the Shahinian "omnis" on the one hand, and relatively narrow-dispersion models like the Quad ESL-988 and other dipoles, or speakers like the Tannoy Dimensions or JBL K2
http://www.ultraaudio.com/equipment/jbl_k2_s9800.htm
This means that you hear more of the direct sound coming straight to you from the loudspeakers, and proportionally less sound reflected from the walls, floor, and ceiling than you would using a speaker with a much wider dispersion characteristic, such as the B&W Nautilus models.

I could also do this all day ;)

the issue of B&W nautilus dispersion is fairly clear. Whether they are a good overall speaker is certainly debatable.

The Avalon and VS VR9Se's have the bases covered in both regards, however.

coldmachine

07-04-07, 05:26 AM

All of the larger Genelecs are designed with off axis imageing in mind.

noah katz

07-04-07, 01:17 PM

Sherv,

"Mirage Omni 60 ^"

"lol....you HAVE to be joking, right?"

I had to look twice to see that the FR plots included 0, 15, and 30 deg, they were that close, so I don't get your criticism.

Jonomega

07-04-07, 01:58 PM

http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/Nxttdfig08.jpg XD
http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/306MA6fig4.jpg MA-RS8
http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/607Wilfig07.jpg WP8
http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1205802fig5.jpg 802D

No comment from me, I just posted for my own reference because its easier to view these at the same time in this fashion (rather than with the words all around the pictures within an internet window). Seems like the Monitor Audio has decent dispersion.

Alimentall

07-05-07, 05:20 AM

the issue of B&W nautilus dispersion is fairly clear. .

Not really. People say they are wide dispersion because B&W tells them they are. And, if you count the flare up at 90 degrees, perhaps, but it's in the listening window that it really matters and the point being that it's not coherent or smooth. Drops off way too fast. That's nothing against them *necessarily* as to whether they sound good. I think they sound *good*, but I wouldn't call them "wide dispersion" because, IMO, it width doesn't matter if it's erratic.

I *would* add Matrix 801s to the list. They do have pretty wide dispersion. I heard some ancient ones a few months ago (again) and was surprised at some of the things they do that the new ones can't do nearly as well.

There were some speakers I saw at CES a few years ago that were similar to MBLs. I can't remember the name though. European, possibly French. They were pretty holographic, but not necessarily that great tonally (typical CES room though).

Jim HTPC

07-05-07, 07:28 AM

I second the Genelec speaker for Home Theater.

Especially if you are considering a Proscenium. When you utilize rack mounts for your gear it takes up valuable space that your front left and front right speakers may need to be for proper height placement. Also the Genelec speakers are designed to be flush mount while B&W's like to be off the wall minimizing your options for speaker placement.

What is cool is you can stand the speaker upside down and rotate the tweeter/midrange 180 degrees (or not), or use an identical speaker for the center channel and rotate the tweeter/midrange 90/270 degrees for perfect 3 speaker timbre matching and proper AXIS orientation.

You also have remote triggering, auto sense, bass rolloff and tilt controls on the back of the Genelec's speaker for taming wild rooms. You always need Acoustic treatments for any home theater in my opinion. They make such a huge difference no matter what speaker you choose.

Some of the newer speakers like B&W Diamond series can not be positioned this way; so making a home theater can be challenging. Even though I enjoy listening to the 802D's with monoblock amps, it just doesn't feel like a theater with the speakers out in the room. It also depends on your width of the wall. If you are buying for "pretty" looks you most likely would not pick the Genelec speaker. It was a struggle for me as well. Until I heard the 3 - HT315A in the front. Blew me away!

I've not heard a Home Theater setup match a Genelec system dollar for dollar.
Also when you get a Genelec installation, you will most likely get an audio professional who has been in the music industry most of their lives to "dial in" your gear. That's how it is in Florida.

noah katz

07-05-07, 02:09 PM

If those Genelecs use waveguides, they have the further advanatge of better controlled dispersion at wider angles (less room reflections) and better power response at the high end.

kwtoxman

07-06-07, 04:56 PM

Most Canadian speaker companies design their speakers with wide dispersion with flat frequency response.

So add Totem and Energy (the veritas i for high end)

kw.....

Mikenificent1

07-09-07, 07:53 PM

lol....you HAVE to be joking, right? I've usually had the same viewpoints with you, but are you telling me that the mirage Omni makes your list? :eek:

no seriously. here is its 180 deg dispersion as per your link:
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/mirage_omni60/deviation_180.gif

too bad it doesn't show the angle axis, but we both know its pretty awful. The FR alone is something to cringe at.

of course you can.....its your way of manipulating the conversation into making the Nautilus line look however you want to potray it. Too the soundstage links didn't have a nautilus line to show off, or it would make your point null ;)

who implied that? Have you even heard a pair of Avalon Eidolons? they make your belove NHT XD's look like Computer speakers in comparison in not only dispersion, but depth, imaging, and soundstage. Like I said, you should really get a pair, and do a blind listening test. I'm sure a lot of your preconcieved ideas will be changed in a hurry.

Either you didn't read the subject line of this thread, you don't know what a sweet spot really is, or your just talking out of your a$$. I think it's a combination of all three. The N800 series DOES NOT have a wide sweet spot, in fact it is very narrow. I had the N801, any head shifts could easily be heard with the image wandering in the same direction. Same thing with the Eidolon's, especially since it's a monopole that neads to set up with no toe in for best FR. It has a narrow seet spot.

I definitely recommend KEF's, wide sweet spot; especially the models with out the super tweeters which narrow the SS a bit. MBL's as well. Jeff Joseph's seemed pretty good under show conditions.

Anybody know if Piega's with the coincident ribbons such as the C8 have a wide sweet spot?

ssabripo

07-09-07, 10:23 PM

sorry Mike, but I didn't really read after your childish rhetoric and banter...the whole "a$$" thing was enough for me, so I stopped reading after that.

next time you wanna make a point or disagree, use some intelligent sentences, and perhaps people will see your point, like Allimental does.

Howard Ferstler

05-07-10, 07:34 PM

I am late to this rather dated discussion, but I did want to make some points.

First, in the old days the champion wide-dispersion speaker available was the Acoustic Research AR-LST, designed by Roy Allison. It featured angled front panels and this allowed tweeters and mids to spread the sound around exceptionally well.

Later on, Allison started his own company, and developed tweeter and midrange drivers that were as smooth, flat, and powerful off axis as they were on axis. (They actually simulated pulsating hemispheres.) And when I say off axis I am not just talking about 45 or 60 degees off, but also 75 and 90 degrees off, with the tweeter midrange combo working that way to well beyond 10 kHz. Allison also produced speakers with triangular front panel configurations (the Model One, Model Two, Model Four, and IC-20) that mounted the drivers on panels already angled at 45 degrees to each side. I do believe that no other speakers on the market had as wide a front-hemisphere ratiation as those models. There was really no contest, actually.

Interestingly, I have auditioned and reviewed a lot of speakers (mostly in level-matched comparison situations), and to be truthful wide-dispersion models DO NOT offer up any image-stabilizing advantages over more conventional designs. Indeed, rather directional speakers, such as what Dunlavy produced, when toed inward substantially, trigger a time/intensity tradeoff that does indeed stabilize the soundstage and keep centered images centered even when listening from off axis. Wide-dispersion speakers normally cannot do this, although they can deliver a sense of wide-stage spaciousness.

Perhaps the best compromise between wide and narrow dispersion when it comes to stabilizing the soundstage was delivered by the dbx Soundfield One system designed by Mark Davis decades ago. Not actually a "normal" wide-dispersion design, it produced a wide-bandwidth, egg-shaped polar response that allowed for both the spaciousness of wide dispersion and image stability of toed-in directional speakers.

Howard Ferstler

Health Nut

05-09-10, 01:29 PM

FST B&Ws have very erratic dispersion that would preclude them from the listen almost automatically. They're very sensitive to seating position.

Your so biased and incorrect it is rediculous.

thebland

05-09-10, 03:03 PM

Wide dispersion. I'm a believer. My SPL Runts have the necessary horn compression drivers (& a pair of 8" drivers). High sensitivity for hi spls. Very nice!

mark haflich

05-09-10, 07:40 PM

Any THX certified speakers will be wide horizontal dispersion and narrow vertical dispersion. The center channel will normally be almost identicsl in size and driver complement to the left right but the tweeter will be roated 90 degrees to have the same dispersion pattern.. the three speakers will then have almost the same dispersion pattern and listeners off to the side of the center will hear it almost as if they weere parked in front of it. with wide horizontal dispersion it is critical that each listener hear the speakers ib a direct line of sight without any bounce off the side walls. This means that once the sound passes the first row of listeners it is absorbed by at least 6 dbs. In a THX theater you will see a narrow band of absorbtion material above your head about at the ear height of the next row of seats. So you need a band just before the first row as well at the first row ear height. Using this methodology one will obtain extrememely good sound positioning corresponding to where the actor is on the screen. There is a scene in an Indiana jones movie where Indiana`s father played by Sean Connery is seating in the back seat of a Jeep. indy is driving. He leans forwards and the voice follows. It is uncanny/ but to get this effect right, the three speakers must be identical.

Alimentall

05-09-10, 07:48 PM

Speedskater

05-09-10, 08:00 PM

From ZDNET:

What does THX certification mean for HDTVs?

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/home-theater/what-does-thx-certification-mean-for-hdtvs/3208?tag=nl.e589

Alimentall

05-09-10, 08:06 PM

Your so biased and incorrect it is rediculous.

1. You can't spell.

2. I'm correct.

3. You're 3 years late to be commenting.

Alimentall

05-09-10, 08:07 PM

From ZDNET:

What does THX certification mean for HDTVs?

Money for THX?

thebland

05-09-10, 08:41 PM

Any THX certified speakers will be wide horizontal dispersion and narrow vertical dispersion.

If I recall correctly, THX requires a baffle wall for those using Microperfs!

http://www.winglake.com/images/components_current/bafflewall2.jpg

mark haflich

05-09-10, 11:50 PM

thebland

05-10-10, 06:43 AM

No. I haven`t read any pamphlet. I learned this in THX training years ago and from observation doing my own experiments and in obseving THX commercial theaters.

Jeff. Can you explain further? What do you mean by a baffle wall and where would it be placed? Thanks.

Mark,

See below: The speakers I use are oriented for a very wide horizontal distribution and limited vertical. Add the baffle wall, and then you've got a close to ideal LCR set up.

FROM THX:

Unique to every THX Certified Cinema is the THX “baffle wall.” If you were to peel away the screen at any THX Certified Cinema, you will see a massive wall of speakers housed in an acoustic baffle (speaker system enclosure).

The baffle wall is approximately the same size as the screen, providing a solid, smooth and uninterrupted surface to distribute sound throughout the auditorium. It produces a large sound image and accurately tracks sound elements with the onscreen action. This makes panning shots and off-screen sounds more believable and natural, helping to pull audiences into the storyline. Without a baffle wall, sound is uncontrolled – producing a weak, uneven image.

With The Baffle Wall
The baffle wall in a THX Certified Cinema controls the sound behind the screen – projecting a smooth audio experience out to the audience.

Without The Baffle Wall
Without the baffle wall, sound is uncontrolled behind the screen – producing a weak sound image that “jumps” across the screen.

Dennis Erskine

05-10-10, 07:03 AM

For the above reasons, THX wants baffle walls; but, in addition to the above, a baffle wall creates a 2pi response placing more of the acoustic energy into the listening area. Otherwise, significant amounts of the speaker's output must be absorbed (behind the speaker) to smooth speaker response. A conundrum for speaker designers is the built-in partial baffle found in pretty much all speakers...called the cabinet. The higher frequencies from the tweeter will exhibit a 2pi response through a portion of their frequency range. Once the wave length exceeds the distance from the center of the tweeter to the edge of the cabinet, the cabinet is no longer acting as a baffle ... you can imagine this is not helpful to a speaker designer ... yet another set of variables mucking up the perfect plan.

THX required controlled vertical directivity for consumer speakers. The purpose was to reduce the amount of acoustic energy reflecting off the ceiling and floor in a home. In the overall scheme of things, very few residential installations could, or wanted to, install ceiling treatments. Controlled horizontal and vertical dispersion was a THX requirement for commercial cinema speakers. Due to large room sizes and larger speaker to ear distances, the idea was to direct more of the speaker's output into the seating locations.

Alimentall

05-10-10, 02:18 PM

I've found that THX speakers have mediocre horizontal dispersion and terrible vertical dispersion. And really mediocre sound partly because of it.

Alimentall

05-10-10, 02:20 PM

PS - the new $2000/pr PSB ImagineTs have AWESOME horizontal dispersion, both sonically and measured. In fact, about the only conventional speaker I've seen that will match the Xd system.

Alimentall

05-10-10, 02:23 PM

THX required controlled vertical directivity for consumer speakers.

Correct. I believe way too many people confuse this with wide dispersion.

mmiles

05-10-10, 07:37 PM

Jeff,

We use RUNTS for monitors in our church system. Pretty good speakers.

Our mains "look like" TRIKs and td1/subs

Howard Ferstler

05-20-10, 06:22 PM

R Harkness

05-20-10, 11:28 PM

I've always been kind of a speaker-slut; just can't have enough of 'em. Although I've had to start selling some to finance my home theater reno (finished now, thank goodness).

Anyway, I've had all sorts of designs in my listening room, including some known for champion "imaging" characteristics. Right now I have some Waveform speakers (anyone remember the Canadian-made speakers with the Egg-shaped mid/tweeter modules?), also some MBL 121 omnidirectional speakers (monitors). I recently sold some Meadowlark monitors and my (sniffle) pair of Audio Physic Scorpio speakers.
I also use Hales Transcendence T1 monitors in my home theater and also for music listening.

I have to say that in terms of imaging, they are all very similar in being able to place a very boxless spread of sound between the speakers. You'd think that the Waveform and especially the MBLs would have the best off-sweet-spot imaging but I don't necessarily find it to be the case (I think the Meadowlark stand mounted monitors actually did best in that department!). I suppose it could be my room, which is 15 x 13', although it has been acoustically treated in consultation with a professional acoustician.

What you get with the MBLs especially is tonal consistency no matter where you sit - at least compared to all the others. And...btw...the MBLs have astonishingly natural "transparency" and tonal richness. They do perhaps the overall most amazing "putting real musicians in front of you" act. FWIW.

NIN74

05-21-10, 06:15 AM

Do not agree at all! The MBL (101?) I have listen to have color the sound a LOT. Mouths is really big and it adds a big sound to whatever you put on them. Far from natural according to me.

R Harkness

05-21-10, 09:24 AM

Do not agree at all! The MBL (101?) I have listen to have color the sound a LOT. Mouths is really big and it adds a big sound to whatever you put on them. Far from natural according to me.

That kind of thing is also going to depend on placement; a wide spacing is going to expand "image sizes" with pretty much any speaker. I'm not getting
the too-big singer thing at home.

BTW, as someone who does a lot of live-vs-reproduced sound comparisons, one thing that always impresses me is how BIG real life sound is compared to that reproduced by the typical consumer/audiophile system. Listen to a real saxophone play in front of you (even quietly), then take your favorite saxophone recording and play it on most audiophile systems and see just how compressed and tiny that sax sounds in comparison.

I find this especially true with violins; a single real-life violin sounds so much bigger, fuller and richer than the typical recording/reproduction of a single violin.

As for the MBL the upper frequencies are phenomenal (as most professional reviewers have noted). They are incredibly smooth, full and life-like. Every time I heard the MBL 101s at shows (or other places) all other speakers afterward sounded like tweeters-in-a-box. I get the same impression from listening to them at home.

Not that they are perfect or that I don't really enjoy aspects of other speakers.

NIN74

05-21-10, 11:39 AM

I do not agree at all. Music that is clearly recorded with minimum room info sound like they where recorded in a big church. The upper frequencies are really the big problem, it don't sound real at all.
If I remember correctly the stereophile measurements showed big problems in the upper frequencies.

R Harkness

05-21-10, 06:34 PM

Actually if you read Fremer's review of the MBL 101E you'll see him raving about the MBL's tonal qualities and the treble, stating he rates the tweeter as among the best, with excellent image focus, density and realism.

JA in his review of the MBLs first found there to be treble hash but then realised it was the metallic speaker grills. Once he removed them everything changed and he stated the upper frequencies of the MBL were "pure magic" with a seamless balance, accurate imaging and focus and an addictive clarity. Pretty much what I hear too.

As I said I'm very familiar with live vs recorded sounds - it's what I do for a living. And I have a number of recordings I've made of various instruments and voices I'm familiar with. I can do direct A/B comparisons between live and recorded and do this with almost every speaker that enters my house.

I just played a recording I made of my son playing saxophone, through the MBLs. If you stand just outside the room the realism of the sound is just hair-raising on the MBLs, a notch above other speakers I've tried. I pretty much guarantee if you heard it and weren't told it wasn't real, you'd presume someone was playing a saxophone in the room.

But we aren't going to convince one another over the Internet, so we may as well leave it at the fact our opinions differ.

NIN74

05-22-10, 09:40 AM

What Fremer says do not hold water at all IMO. And JA said the opposite if I remember correctly, that one should leave the grill on, to tame the upper frequencies.
I do agree that we will not onvince one another and that is fine. You like them, I think they are bad. Take care

RUR

05-22-10, 11:03 AM

And JA said the opposite if I remember correctly, that one should leave the grill on, to tame the upper frequencies.

I became more bothered by the MBL's behavior at the other end of the spectrum. While the level of the high frequencies seemed natural, their quality was a little hashy. Without being balanced by the hummy pre-spike lows, this hashy quality became irritating.

Visiting friends were commenting on this problem, so it seemed an ideal opportunity to remove the grilles. We were listening to "Mexico," from James Taylor's superb 1993 Live album (Columbia C2K 47056), and to say our jaws dropped when I took the Nu-Vista CD player out of Pause is no exaggeration. Not only did the hashy quality vanish with the 111B au naturel, but there was now an airy freedom to the upper octaves that was pure magic. The speaker looks distinctly unfinished without its grille, but that's a price I willingly pay to get such magic.

And with spikes and without a grille, the MBL 111B's balance was seamless from bottom to top, with no sense of any discontinuities between the four different drive-units. http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/643/index1.html

R Johnson

05-22-10, 03:33 PM

BTW, as someone who does a lot of live-vs-reproduced sound comparisons, one thing that always impresses me is how BIG real life sound is compared to that reproduced by the typical consumer/audiophile system. Listen to a real saxophone play in front of you (even quietly), then take your favorite saxophone recording and play it on most audiophile systems and see just how compressed and tiny that sax sounds in comparison.

I find this especially true with violins; a single real-life violin sounds so much bigger, fuller and richer than the typical recording/reproduction of a single violin.
I had the opportunity last night to attend a "Musical Evening" at the studio of a pianist / teacher. The sound from a Steinway concert grand about 10 feet away is stunning. As was the sound from the violinist performing the Beethoven Kreutzer Sonata.