Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium
Why do people buy Porsches or Corvettes?
I feel addressed here, I have three SEOS-24™ on order...
Besides, i don't really fancy pro speakers per se. These sound horrible sometimes when I go to gigs, indoor and outdoor, or at the movie theatre. I fancy getting as little as possible distortion at every possible SPL and every audible frequency the movie ever reaches, and this for all the people whether they sit central or at the side!
We build big because we can. Just like Piech did when he pushed for the Veyron. Or Kennedy when he announced to go to the moon.
We're capable of doing many
things, still, the one's worth doing should have a purpose...like traveling to the moon.
I wasn't personally addressing anyone, but rather simply asking what kind of real-world/measurable dilemmas these solved over the exiting 12-15" SEOS, so I appreciate the response that addressed the actual question by stating that the goal is to increase directivity a bit lower.
Again, I didn't realize these were really issues (audible ones, anyway) per se, in a typically-sized room where listeners are 5-15/20 feet away. Giant horn/WG arrays seem (to me anyway) purposed for venues substantially larger than someone's living room or basement and thus why you do not see them in most loudspeaker systems built for the latter, regardless of price. Shows what I know, obviously.
The whole idea of directivity miffs me sometimes altogether, admittedly. Naturally-occuring sound reflects off its surroundings in virtually every space, all the time. Instruments, voices, drums, explosions, trains, etc. So then, these sounds will absolutely
measure differently than if they were emanating from a small(er) source with a horn/waveguide controlling their output. So sometimes the need/desire to have sound NOT reflect (coming from a speaker) confounds me (although I can understand WHY others find it to be desirable, per below).
Bi polar speakers are looking to do the precise opposite, obviously, and largely purport the aforementioned as to to why THEIR designs offer a more realistic, "you are there" sound. Does a cymbal strike (all else being equal) appear more "real" emanating from a bi-polar speaker than one of this sort? I cannot say with certainty, but I know the differing designs change things for imaging purposes and other such things, so I'd imagine a subjective audition would almost certainly reveal an obvious preference between the two...or at the very least, an easily identifiable difference. Which one is "correct" / acccurate/true-to-source?
It would be great- and a bit ridiculous, lol to place a real cymbal, WG speaker, and bi polar in a room, as similarly situated and level matched as possible, and see what results, in a blind ABC.
I'm really just saying that there seems to be a lot of different opinion on what sounds the "best" or most realistic and it's funny that some of them are nearly directly opposed to one another. Further, assuming there is no "correct" answer, is the SEOS/WG approach a bit of a "fad" in these parts right now, similar to how sealed sub applications were the absolute of absolutes around here for real bass production, but now in the last couple of months we're seeing some doing a 180 and going with much larger, ported, designs as well as many new builds seeming to be tipping towards ported.
Doesn't mean the SEOS is not wonderful and completely viable option, of course, just an honest curiosity.