After receiving my QSC K12 and comparing them to my old monitor audio RS6 i cant believe what ive been missing out on... having a speaker that can hit peaks of 120-125db in my room is a totally different movie experience.
My room is 19x13' sealed.
The question is if anyone has ever gone back to low sensitivity speakers in their theater after hearing high sensitivity? and why?
Im going to go out on a limb and say that the only people with low sensitivity speakers in their theater have never heard high sensitivity speakers or require high WAF. or maybe their room is 12x12
I am very interested in Yorkville. My next pair of speakers will most likely be those, AudioKinesis Prisma, or Soundfield Audio dipole point sources. All high efficiency designs.
Toole is partial to speakers flat far off axis, which precludes constant directivity designs from his theories. Much has changed since then. For instance, I don't believe this was taken into consideration. It's a game changer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 /forum/post/22086430
With all the comparisons being made in this thread, I'd like to point out that those fared well against the GedLee Abbey and Nathan, music and movies. Comparison done by someone who owns all three, and kept all three.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 /forum/post/22086430
With all the comparisons being made in this thread, I'd like to point out that those fared well against the GedLee Abbey and Nathan, music and movies. Comparison done by someone who owns all three, and kept all three.
No surprise there. By the look of it they use an Eminence pro-sound woofer, probably the Delta 10, and when you limit the low frequency corner to 80Hz as they do you can get a very good result for very little cash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omegaslast /forum/post/22075071
See, now we're getting somewhere.. you sit 7 feet away and probably havent listened to a real high sensitivity compression driver design (as pointed out above, klipsch RF series doesnt really count, maybe the RF7 counts... maybe).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 /forum/post/22086444
Toole is partial to speakers flat far off axis, which precludes constant directivity designs from his theories. Much has changed since then. For instance, I don't believe this was taken into consideration. It's a game changer.
I have had many good lower sensitivity speakers but tend to prefer CBT arrays because I can get both excellent sound quality and high output plus large dynamic capability. My earlier experience with straight (conventional arrays) always had me going back to arrays because of the lack of compression. CBT's sacrifice some of the output of a straight array but offer better vertical coverage which surpasses anything else in arrays or conventional designs (a big advantage for theaters with tiered seating).
The woofer also has a uniform radiation pattern, so Earl's thought is why have the HF and LF sections different? In truth it doesn't matter that much on the vertical plane, whereas having similar horizontal dispersion at the crossover frequency is. You can get that result with both HF section types.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice /t/1412527/ht-has-anyone-ever-moved...ers-back-to-low-sensitivity/180#post_22109413
The woofer also has a uniform radiation pattern, so Earl's thought is why have the HF and LF sections different? In truth it doesn't matter that much on the vertical plane, whereas having similar horizontal dispersion at the crossover frequency is. You can get that result with both HF section types.
IMO much ado about not so much. Wayne and Earl both stand foursquare behind the type of horn that they sell, surprise surprise. Should they both show up here to debate their positions it would go on for days, if not weeks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice /t/1412527/ht-has-anyone-ever-moved...ers-back-to-low-sensitivity/180#post_22113230
IMO much ado about not so much. Wayne and Earl both stand foursquare behind the type of horn that they sell, surprise surprise. Should they both show up here to debate their positions it would go on for days, if not weeks.
There are lies, there are damnable lies, and there are statistics. In this case substitute 'charts' for 'statistics'. The lobing shown on that chart is at a certain unspecified distance. What it doesn't show is vertical polar response at a typical listening distance, where said lobes would probably have disappeared. As with statistics charts can be configured to reinforce a particular point of view.
So you don't hear all the floor and ceiling reflections (axes) and the total radiated power summation doesn't change the total tone, timbre, etc. perception at your ears?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA /t/1412527/ht-has-anyone-ever-moved...ers-back-to-low-sensitivity/180#post_22113951
So you don't hear all the floor and ceiling reflections (axes) and the total radiated power summation doesn't change the total tone, timbre, etc. perception at your ears?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice /t/1412527/ht-has-anyone-ever-moved...ers-back-to-low-sensitivity/180#post_22113938
There are lies, there are damnable lies, and there are statistics. In this case substitute 'charts' for 'statistics'. The lobing shown on that chart is at a certain unspecified distance. What it doesn't show is vertical polar response at a typical listening distance, where said lobes would probably have disappeared. As with statistics charts can be configured to reinforce a particular point of view.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
AVS Forum
34M posts
1.5M members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!