Originally Posted by Morbius
Note to all: Here's the typical example of what I call "weasel-wording":the reality is that the on-axis problems are almost entirely canceled ...
"Weasel wording"?!? So, now you're calling John Atkinson a "weasel"? Because he said almost exactly the same thing.
The problem is - how many of us are sitting "on-axis"? ZERO!!!
I sit on axis! Most everyone is going to be within a few degrees of horizontal axis. What the heck are you talking about? Talk about "weasel wording"......
Even if we were sitting on the axis on one speaker, we can't be on the axis of the other.
Again, what the heck are you talking about? Of course you can. The horizontal axis is about 33" off the ground. Everywhere in the room. If you're on axis with one, by definition, you're on axis with the other.
So John makes a "big deal" out of the acoustic cancellation on a line that NONE of us have
our ears on.
Wow, are you really
His statement that the effects are "almost entirely cancelled" is falsified by the fact that
John Atkinson's microphones heard it. If the waves "acoustically cancelled" in the air; then
there wouldn't be any pressure wave to register on Atkinson's microphone.
"Almost entirely cancelled" is equal to "not entirely cancelled" and therefore measureable, but not necessarily audible or objectionable. Here's what John Atkinson said:
"What can also be seen from fig.11 is that each drive-unit's step is preceded by some low-frequency ringing. But because the tweeter's and woofer's acoustic outputs appear to have opposite polarities, this pre-ringing should to a large extent cancel, at least on the tweeter axis. That this does in fact happen is shown by the XdS's overall step response."
Perhaps you prefer his wording? The first two measurable ripples almost exactly cancelled, to the point of barely registering on the graph. The third, biggest ripple, while remaining visible, was a mere fraction of what the non-combined ripples were.
However, Atkinson's microcphone heard it - and if a human had his / her ear where the
microphone was - then the human would have heard it.
Ah, well in that case, let's assume the audibility of *everything* that is measurable. Then you've got *huge* problems with even a big Wilson speaker. You've half a dozen problems in the typical $50K+ speaker that would certainly dwarf the pre-ringing issue. By that standard, the Wilson Maxx 2 and Apogee Divas are so hideously flawed, they should be shot and tossed overboard. Yet you manage to survive their horrendous sonic behaviors. +/-5 or 10dB? Poor horizontal dispersion? Even worse vertical dispersion? Cone resonance? Motor distortion? Spectral decay? It's all measurable and plenty audible (but also somewhat avoidable).
No matter how many times John says "it cancels", "it largely cancels", "almost entirely cancels";
the plain fact is Atkinson's microphone heard it; and so will you!!
Perhaps, but you'll also hear a much great decrease in coloration, distortion, poor integration, poor dispersion, etc, etc, etc that makes you forget all that.
I know I heard the Xd make a "mess" of the microdynamics and timbres; while the same source
material fed to the Lamm-driven Wilsons standing next to the Xds in the same room realistically
reproduced those microdynamics and timbres with aplomb.
Timbre? The Wilson's aren't even *close* to the Xd in quality of timbre. Unless you consider +/-8db to be more faithful than +/- 1.25dB.
John can hem and haw all he wants; but this is getting, and has been, pointless!!!
I'm not hemming and hawing, I'm discussing actual reality, not fantasy or "math".
I must admit I have failed to convert the "true believer". I just hope others take note.
I believe in actual quality and objective performance. Nothing more, nothing less. Excuses walk. You want to cling desperately to old paradigms, that's fine, but most people will listen with an open mind. Not everyone will like, but many, if not most will. Heck, even if a perfect speaker existed, half the population wouldn't like it at all.
If a $40K speaker were worth the money, it would certainly measure equal to or better than Xd. As $ensible Sound said, roughly, "If you buy a 5-figure speaker now, expect to see them used for 1/10 the price in a few years". It's not just Xd that will cause that. There's a whole host of speakers coming with brave new tech.
As is usual with any good medicine, there's always a downside, but the benefits are worth it. If everyone so obsessed with the downsides to everything, a good chunk of us would be dead. The problem with audiophiles is that they refuse to take one step backwards to take 10 steps forward. They inch a long, little by little at a snail's pace, clinging desperately to losing nothing (except for huge sums of cash), but gaining little in the process. I'll glady move the 9 steps forward, rather than the 6" with each new version of a hideously overpriced product.