# of drivers related to sound quality - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
  • 1 Post By afrogt
  • 1 Post By shadyJ
  • 2 Post By Bill Fitzmaurice
  • 1 Post By Bill Fitzmaurice
  • 1 Post By CherylJosie
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 10:07 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
iduhfuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 10
# of drivers related to sound quality

Hi guys, I've been looking around for a while now on what speakers to buy for my 2.1 music listening system. I'm leaning towards the Martin Logan Motion 40 or the Paradigm studio 100. I see that the paradigms have more drivers, and this would theoretically mean more spl/ louder volume. However, does more drivers mean better sound? Can someone educate me on this? Thanks.
iduhfuse is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 10:09 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 27,325
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2025 Post(s)
Liked: 1364
no, not at all. You can have two way speakers that sound better than 3 way speakers. it's more about the design and quality of the components: crossovers, drivers, cabinet bracing, etc.
oneeyeblind likes this.

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #3 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 10:18 AM
 
shadyJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,743
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1330 Post(s)
Liked: 1358
All things being equal, more drivers can improve sound quality. More drivers mean more headroom and less distortion. But all things are rarely equal because all drivers are rarely equal nor is they way they are implemented as afrogt mentioned.
oneeyeblind likes this.
shadyJ is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 01:52 PM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1706
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayGuy View Post
Two-way speakers have two drivers and one crossover. Three-way speakers have three drivers and two crossovers. So, the same money can be spent on three components or five components. Generally, this means that each component will be cheaper in the three-way ... at the same price point. Not to mention the larger cabinet which adds to the overall cost.

Careful, you will have a hard time justifying the concept that the price of audio gear indicates its sound quality

Quote:
The main advantage of a three-way is extended bass response. If you are using a subwoofer, the additional bass extension is redundant. If not, and you want bass that is more extended than a two-way bookshelf speaker, then it may be necessary to compromise on the mid-range and treble response in order to get the additional bass.

Sometimes. I would be willing to bet that every two way speaker system with a 15" woofer has better bass response than my own speakers which have 3 6.5 inch "woofers" per side.
FMW is offline  
post #5 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 02:44 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
iduhfuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay, so multiple drivers for say the midrange frequency don't necessarily mean it would be better than having one driver for that range. Or even one driver to share a midrange and low frequency range like the martin logan motion 20.
iduhfuse is offline  
post #6 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 02:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darthray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cold lake Alberta Canada
Posts: 6,209
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2050 Post(s)
Liked: 2901
Like afrogt said, it's all about the quality and design of the so said speaker.
Some design and quality of their component are better with more drivers, some with less.


Ray
darthray is online now  
post #7 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 02:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
flyng_fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 3,857
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by afrogt View Post
no, not at all. You can have two way speakers that sound better than 3 way speakers. it's more about the design and quality of the components: crossovers, drivers, cabinet bracing, etc.
I didn't notice your sig until just now. I always thought you were A frog T! I guess Afro GT makes more sense.

Television: Vizio E70iA3
Processor: Emotiva MC700
Amps: Carver AV 806x/Behringer EP4000
Mains: DCM TimeFrame 600 Center: AT 453C
Surrounds: AT 2200 LR Sub: Danley DTS-10Blu Ray: Panasonic DMP-BD655
flyng_fool is offline  
post #8 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 03:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RayGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,214
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2530 Post(s)
Liked: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Careful, you will have a hard time justifying the concept that the price of audio gear indicates its sound quality



Which is why I deleted the post. Better isn't ALWAYS better, but it often is.

Last edited by RayGuy; 11-16-2014 at 03:24 PM.
RayGuy is online now  
post #9 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 03:19 PM
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 15,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5767
The reason why multiple drivers are used is dispersion. The larger the driver the narrower its angle of dispersion in the higher frequencies. Rule of thumb is that you don't want the driver cone larger than 1 wavelength (in inches 13,500 divided by the frequency). For instance, a twelve inch driver has a ten inch cone, making it good to perhaps 1.35kHz, above which you should cross over to a smaller driver. The downside of a smaller driver is displacement, the amount of air the cone can move, the requirement for which goes up as frequency goes down. You can get around that by using a lot of smaller drivers, say four sixes instead of one twelve, but that costs more.

As for the ML 40, going from 6.5 inch midbasses to a 5.5 inch midrange isn't the best idea, there just isn't enough difference in the dispersion angle to make it worthwhile, while a pair of 6.5 inch midbasses lack adequate displacement to go low with significant output. IMO a pair of 8 or 10 inch midbasses crossed to a 5.5 inch midrange makes a lot more sense. Using 6.5 inch midbasses you could just as easily go direct to a tweeter and eliminate the midrange entirely, as 6.5 inch midbasses, with 5.5 inch cones, would work perfectly well to 2.5kHz. You'd just have to use a tweeter that's comfortable to 2.5khz.

The Studio 100 is similar, it crosses over from the midbasses at 300Hz, which there's no necessity for with 7 inch drivers. Even fifteen inch subwoofers work just fine to 300Hz.
RPGMasta and oneeyeblind like this.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #10 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 05:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 27,325
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2025 Post(s)
Liked: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyng_fool View Post
I didn't notice your sig until just now. I always thought you were A frog T! I guess Afro GT makes more sense.
Sometimes it can take folks years to notice that. I just take it in stride...

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #11 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 05:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bluewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,651
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2267 Post(s)
Liked: 1492
With speakers of this quality, I think how they sound is more important than the number of drivers -

Martin Logan Motion 40 ($999/each) -

https://www.google.com/search?safe=o...BrU&gws_rd=ssl

Paradigm Studio 100 ($1599 each) -

https://www.google.com/search?safe=o...o4s&gws_rd=ssl

So the first question is ... Have you got an extra $1200 to spend on speakers? If you do, then the Paradigm are worth considering, and ....if you don't ...then not.

In the budget range of $2000/pr to $3200/pr, there are other speakers to consider.

The Martin Logan 40, which I heard and was very impressed with for the money, have TWO 6.5" bass drivers, ONE 5.25" Mid-Bass, and ONE wide dispersion Folded Motion Transducer (tweeter). Frequency response down to 40hz at -3db, with a fair guess at about 33hz to 35hz at -6dB.

http://www.martinlogan.com/pdf/broch...e_motion40.pdf

The Paradigm Studio 100, which are more than the cost of buying a third Motion 40, have THREE 7" bass drivers and ONE 7" Mid-Bass, plus a standard 1" Aluminum Dome Tweeter. Bass response down to 45hz at -2dB, with a best guess of 35hz at -6dB.

http://paradigm.com/products-current...100/page=specs

Both speakers have higher than average Sensitivity ratings. The Motion 40 is 92dB with 2.83v input. The Studio 100 is 92db in-room, 89db anechoic.

But, the real question is, do you like how they sound? Though I've not heard them some have complained that they might be a bit bright. But the true test of either speakers is the clarity and balance.

I suspect the Studio 100 will have more sense of impact since they are pushing considerably more air. How much that benefits you depends on the size and acoustics of your room. And Paradigm do have a very high reputation in speaker making, but so do Martin Logan, Bowers-Wilkins, FOCAL, and others.

More important than how a speaker sounds is how it sounds to you. Two people can listen to the same speakers, and one will love it and one will hate it, and you know what...they are both right. What matters, since you are laying the money down, is what you think.

The Paradigm are considerably more expensive, and contrary to the contrarians, more money most often does mean a better speaker. There are certainly exceptions; that we would all acknowledge, but they are just that ... exceptions. As a general rule, sound quality is related to cost. But once again, more important to sound quality, is whether you personally like the speaker or not.

Here are some alternatives to consider -

Bowers-Wilkins CM9-S2 ($1599 each) -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/bowers-w...&skuId=8441027

CM9 have a softer smoother more controlled bass.

FOCAL Aria 936 ($3600/pair) -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...0034-_-Product

Focal are crystal clear, and though they still have pretty good bass, the sacrifice a bit of bass in exchanged for improved clarity.

As I said, I suspect you will gain something from the Paradigm Studio 100, but it is going to cost you $1200 more. You have to decide if it is worth it.

It really depends on your circumstances and priorities. With the right Priorities, these might be speakers worth looking at -

Polk Audio RTi-A9 ($750 each) -

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_107RTIA...A9-Cherry.html

Or, if you want to bring the Thunder, but still maintain the Light, consider these larger Martin Logan Motion 60 -

Martin Logan Motion 60XL ($1499 to $1650 EACH) -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/martinlo...&skuId=7730107

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/martinlo...&skuId=8341019

TWIN 8" bass driver each, ONE 6.5" Mid-Bass, and the Folded Motion Transducer (tweeter). Rated at 35hz at -3db, pretty much guaranteeing 30hz or LESS at -6dB.

If you are searching for a real bargain, then the previous version FOCAL 836 can be had on close out -

Focal Chorus 836 Floorstanding (Retail $3200, Sale $1899/pr, supplies limited) -

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-139685-...eakers-pr.aspx

As to the original speakers, It seems the real choice would be between the Martin Logan Motion 60XT and the Paradigm Studio 100.

If you are lean on cash, then the Martin Logan Motion 40 is a pretty impressive speaker for a modest $2000/pair.

Steve/bluewizard

Last edited by bluewizard; 11-16-2014 at 05:56 PM.
bluewizard is offline  
post #12 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 06:15 PM
Member
 
darkpoet25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 40
http://ascendacoustics.com/pages/pro...s/SRT/srt.html
These are in the $2k range and the owners are quite happy with them. Another speaker to consider.

Cliff
darkpoet25 is offline  
post #13 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 08:01 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
iduhfuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Bluewizard that definitely helped me thank you. However, I do know that Martin logan isn't that great at reproducing low frequencies for its Motion lineup. I do have a 500 watt 12 inch subwoofer I use with my current polk rti10s. If I were to purchase a motion 20 vs a motion 40 using the subwoofer, would the extra bass driver in the motion 40 be redundant if I am crossing over around 80hz? Same goes for the paradigm studio 60 vs the studio 100. Btw I can get these two speaker brands through a dealer at around the same price.
iduhfuse is offline  
post #14 of 29 Old 11-16-2014, 09:37 PM
Member
 
RPGMasta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Hurst, TX
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 20
My opinion is that Golden Ear Triton 7s blow away the Motion 40s. $600 less per pair is a bonus.

Sometimes our circuits get shorted by external interference,
Signals get crossed and the balance distorted by internal incoherence.
RPGMasta is offline  
post #15 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 06:23 AM
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 15,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by iduhfuse View Post
If I were to purchase a motion 20 vs a motion 40 using the subwoofer, would the extra bass driver in the motion 40 be redundant if I am crossing over around 80hz?
Totally redundant. For that matter so is using a floorstander, as their lower extension compared to a bookshelf is not being utilized when you have subs. In your case you'd be far better of with bookshelves optimized to give the best result above 80Hz, using the $$ saved to get another sub, as one sub cannot smooth out in-room response, while one twelve cannot duplicate a real theater experience. In the ML line the Motion 30 or Motion 50 would be my choices but for the fact that they can't be placed vertical for left/right use due to the tweeter alignment. From an engineering standpoint the omission of a vertical MTM design is an odd choice. From a marketing standpoint it kind of makes some sense, as the average user tends to think that if you're going to go with a dual midbass cab that a floorstander will work better. The informed user knows that's not the case, but that's apparently not who ML is trying to sell to. Paradigm is no better, as they also don't offer an MTM.
IMO what you should be looking at is the configuration of the Ascend CMT-340SE. I imagine someone must make an MTM with a ribbon tweeter, if that's what you're after.
oneeyeblind likes this.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #16 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 07:32 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
iduhfuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay, that makes sense. However, I like the convienence of not having to find a good set of stands. Which I can probably get away with something like the motion 20 then use maybe a two sub system. I didn't really know of golden ear until now but it seems very good, if not better than martin Logan with the fact that I most likely won't need the subwoofer. Any opinions on golden ear triton three with no sub vs martin Logan motion 20 with a sub? Remember that this is just for music listening no home theater.
iduhfuse is offline  
post #17 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 07:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,407
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11718 Post(s)
Liked: 9256
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
With speakers of this quality, I think how they sound is more important than the number of drivers -

Martin Logan Motion 40 ($999/each) -

https://www.google.com/search?safe=o...BrU&gws_rd=ssl

Paradigm Studio 100 ($1599 each) -

https://www.google.com/search?safe=o...o4s&gws_rd=ssl

So the first question is ... Have you got an extra $1200 to spend on speakers? If you do, then the Paradigm are worth considering, and ....if you don't ...then not.

In the budget range of $2000/pr to $3200/pr, there are other speakers to consider.

The Martin Logan 40, which I heard and was very impressed with for the money, have TWO 6.5" bass drivers, ONE 5.25" Mid-Bass, and ONE wide dispersion Folded Motion Transducer (tweeter). Frequency response down to 40hz at -3db, with a fair guess at about 33hz to 35hz at -6dB.

http://www.martinlogan.com/pdf/broch...e_motion40.pdf

The Paradigm Studio 100, which are more than the cost of buying a third Motion 40, have THREE 7" bass drivers and ONE 7" Mid-Bass, plus a standard 1" Aluminum Dome Tweeter. Bass response down to 45hz at -2dB, with a best guess of 35hz at -6dB.

http://paradigm.com/products-current...100/page=specs

Both speakers have higher than average Sensitivity ratings. The Motion 40 is 92dB with 2.83v input. The Studio 100 is 92db in-room, 89db anechoic.

But, the real question is, do you like how they sound? Though I've not heard them some have complained that they might be a bit bright. But the true test of either speakers is the clarity and balance.

I suspect the Studio 100 will have more sense of impact since they are pushing considerably more air. How much that benefits you depends on the size and acoustics of your room. And Paradigm do have a very high reputation in speaker making, but so do Martin Logan, Bowers-Wilkins, FOCAL, and others.

More important than how a speaker sounds is how it sounds to you. Two people can listen to the same speakers, and one will love it and one will hate it, and you know what...they are both right. What matters, since you are laying the money down, is what you think.

The Paradigm are considerably more expensive, and contrary to the contrarians, more money most often does mean a better speaker. There are certainly exceptions; that we would all acknowledge, but they are just that ... exceptions. As a general rule, sound quality is related to cost. But once again, more important to sound quality, is whether you personally like the speaker or not.

Here are some alternatives to consider -

Bowers-Wilkins CM9-S2 ($1599 each) -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/bowers-w...&skuId=8441027

CM9 have a softer smoother more controlled bass.

FOCAL Aria 936 ($3600/pair) -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...0034-_-Product

Focal are crystal clear, and though they still have pretty good bass, the sacrifice a bit of bass in exchanged for improved clarity.

As I said, I suspect you will gain something from the Paradigm Studio 100, but it is going to cost you $1200 more. You have to decide if it is worth it.

It really depends on your circumstances and priorities. With the right Priorities, these might be speakers worth looking at -

Polk Audio RTi-A9 ($750 each) -

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_107RTIA...A9-Cherry.html

Or, if you want to bring the Thunder, but still maintain the Light, consider these larger Martin Logan Motion 60 -

Martin Logan Motion 60XL ($1499 to $1650 EACH) -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/martinlo...&skuId=7730107

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/martinlo...&skuId=8341019

TWIN 8" bass driver each, ONE 6.5" Mid-Bass, and the Folded Motion Transducer (tweeter). Rated at 35hz at -3db, pretty much guaranteeing 30hz or LESS at -6dB.

If you are searching for a real bargain, then the previous version FOCAL 836 can be had on close out -

Focal Chorus 836 Floorstanding (Retail $3200, Sale $1899/pr, supplies limited) -

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-139685-...eakers-pr.aspx

As to the original speakers, It seems the real choice would be between the Martin Logan Motion 60XT and the Paradigm Studio 100.

If you are lean on cash, then the Martin Logan Motion 40 is a pretty impressive speaker for a modest $2000/pair.

Steve/bluewizard
I have listened to the 60XL's and they are a nice sounding speaker. I like the AMT tweeter. I am using a horn loaded version in my speakers.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #18 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 09:47 AM
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 15,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by iduhfuse View Post
Okay, that makes sense. However, I like the convienence of not having to find a good set of stands.
So do I. My L/R are hung on the wall.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #19 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 10:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Elihawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Posts: 5,991
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1880 Post(s)
Liked: 1981
I think HTD level three speakers are ribbon tweeter with a MTM design in the center.

Set up #1: EMP e5Ti, e5Ci, and EMP e5Bi surrounds, Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub, SVS NSD SB12 sub, Marantz Slimeline 1504 AV receiver
Set up #2: Def Tech SM450, CLR2002, SLS Qline surrounds and EMPtek10i10i sub, Denon 1910 AV receiver
Set up #3: Philharmonics- BMR in a 2.0 system, music only, Yamaha RXV-363 AV receiver
Elihawk is offline  
post #20 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 12:04 PM
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 15,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elihawk View Post
I think HTD level three speakers are ribbon tweeter with a MTM design in the center.
The center is, but like the above mentioned it can't be used vertically as a left/right. Why they offer a dual woofer center but not a dual woofer left/right is a mystery to me.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #21 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 01:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ousooner2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 292 Post(s)
Liked: 179
And why would they use a 2" midrange at 725/18dB...coming from dual 8's

Currently Auditioning: Klipsch RP-150M
SOLD: EMP e55ti / EMP e56ci / EMP e5bi / (2) e1010i
FOR SALE --- 1 EMP Tek/RBH Sound e1010i sub: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/209-au...al-10-sub.html
ousooner2 is offline  
post #22 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 01:42 PM
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 15,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by ousooner2 View Post
And why would they use a 2" midrange at 725/18dB...coming from dual 8's
I can't say, but I wouldn't. They also claim that they use a 1/12 octave transmission line. There's no such thing, a transmission line is a 1/4 wavelength device.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #23 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 01:56 PM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1706
Take a look at the EMP E55 or whatever RBH calls it now. You get MTM for the mid range and tweeter and 3 small woofers for the bass - all for $800 a pair, shipping included. I'll bet it will play right along with the Martin Logan and the Paradigm. Here are mine. They are amazing with a capital A given the selling price.



One other comment. I understand Bill's comments about the waste of using floor speakers with a subwoofer. I agree with him for video and movie watching. But I disagree for music listening. I have the luxury of having the same tweeter and mid range drivers in bookshelf speakers. They don't sound the same nor do they sound as good as the three way floor models - with or without a subwoofer.
FMW is offline  
post #24 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 02:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
datranz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: fontana, california
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 48
The less driver the better. The more driver their is the less coherent the sound will be. But you will lose spl with less driver. Full range driver not applicable.
datranz is offline  
post #25 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 02:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ousooner2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 292 Post(s)
Liked: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
I can't say, but I wouldn't. They also claim that they use a 1/12 octave transmission line. There's no such thing, a transmission line is a 1/4 wavelength device.
Magic!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Take a look at the EMP E55 or whatever RBH calls it now. You get MTM for the mid range and tweeter and 3 small woofers for the bass - all for $800 a pair, shipping included. I'll bet it will play right along with the Martin Logan and the Paradigm. Here are mine. They are amazing with a capital A given the selling price.



One other comment. I understand Bill's comments about the waste of using floor speakers with a subwoofer. I agree with him for video and movie watching. But I disagree for music listening. I have the luxury of having the same tweeter and mid range drivers in bookshelf speakers. They don't sound the same nor do they sound as good as the three way floor models - with or without a subwoofer.
+1. These are some great speakers for the money. BF deals on these are just crazy

Quote:
Originally Posted by datranz View Post
The less driver the better. The more driver their is the less coherent the sound will be. But you will lose spl with less driver. Full range driver not applicable.
My Micca MB42x's sound worse than my RBH r55ti's

Currently Auditioning: Klipsch RP-150M
SOLD: EMP e55ti / EMP e56ci / EMP e5bi / (2) e1010i
FOR SALE --- 1 EMP Tek/RBH Sound e1010i sub: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/209-au...al-10-sub.html
ousooner2 is offline  
post #26 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 02:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bluewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,651
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2267 Post(s)
Liked: 1492
Quote:
Originally Posted by iduhfuse View Post
Okay, so multiple drivers for say the midrange frequency don't necessarily mean it would be better than having one driver for that range. Or even one driver to share a midrange and low frequency range like the martin logan motion 20.
Twin Midrange drivers does have advantages, but not the advantages you would think.

If Twin Mid are wired in Series, then the sound output is identical to a single driver. But, each driver is driven half as hard, and will handle double the power.

If Twin Mid are wired in Parallel, there will be an increased output, but then you tend to have impedance problems. About the best you can do is two 8 ohms in parallel for a resulting impedance of 4 ohms. That's not terrible, most amps can easily handle 4 ohms, especially in the midrange. But it is a design consideration.

Now if you are a speaker manufacturer and you design your own drivers, you can have them made to any impedance you want ... within reason. But there are trade offs there too. Every design is a compromise. What are you willing to trade in one area to maximize something in another area.

Though not always so, generally, most Mid driver are not Midrange drivers, but rather Mid-Bass drivers. If you look at the crossover frequencies in the specs of a given speakers, if the Low to Mid crossover is relatively low, then very likely it is a Mid-Bass design.

There two common 3-way designs -

The older Woofer, Mid-Range, Tweeter designs.

But modern speakers take a slightly difference approach. They are Low-Bas, Mid-Bass, Tweeter designs. Typically these use larger Mid-Bass drivers, which is one clue as to the design.

Some seeming 3-way speakers are actually 2.5-way. In the low bass area, both Low-Bass and Mid-Bass run in parallel, both playing music. As the frequency rises, the Low-Bass drops out and the Mid-Bass carries on. Again, the strongest clue is the location of the Low-Bass to Mid-Bass crossover.

As an example, in a 2.5-way system, the Low-Bass to Mid-Bass Crossover might be around 200hz.

In a modern 3-way, the Low-Bass to Mid-Bass crossover might be 400hz.

In a old fashioned 3-way, the Woofer to Mid-Range might be around 800hz.

All these are valid speaker designs, and all can yield good results, but each compromises the design in a slightly different way.

As other has said, you ears will tell you what you like best. But any design method is capable of yielding a great sounding speaker.

Because I'm a bit old school, I like big Bass Drivers. I come from an age when dinosaurs roamed the earth and the average kid on the street had speakers with 12" woofers. If you had 8" woofers you were considered an amateur in the world of music listening. Today, you would be very luck to even find woofers larger than 8". Though admittedly most speakers with 8" woofers have TWIN 8" woofers in each box.

Just as a point of interest, here is some information I gathered about the relative size of various bass drivers. This can help you determine the equivalent of 3x6.5" bass drivers.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-spe...-vs-those.html

For example, 1x6.5" has a relative value of 2.64, so 3x6.5" would have a relative value of 3 x 2.64 = 7.92

A single 8" driver has a relative value of 4, so two 8" drivers would have a relative value of 8.

Comparing the two, we see that 3x6.5" equal 7.92 and 2x8" equals 8. Those are relatively the same size.

This isn't definitive, it is just a guide for relative speaker size.

But the charts could come in handy for someone needing to compare two speakers with a different number of different sized drivers.

Steve/bluewizard
bluewizard is offline  
post #27 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 03:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by datranz View Post
The less driver the better. The more driver their is the less coherent the sound will be. But you will lose spl with less driver. Full range driver not applicable.
Just to clarify this...

The efficiency of a speaker is directly related to the surface area of the drivers. In general, all else being equal, the more surface area there is, the more efficiency.

Multiple drivers increase efficiency (and power handling too) without sacrificing bandwidth and without causing 'beaming' of the sound. Line arrays work on this principle, partly. Tower speakers may have seemingly nonsensical choice of drivers until the target SPL, cabinet tuning and dispersion are taken into account, at which point it might make more sense that there are 3 woofers in the bottom and 2 mids (MTM configuration) all the same size in one cabinet. Then suddenly the reasoning becomes clear.

Multiple woofers help keep the cabinet dimensions under control and are particularly suited to shallow narrow towers. Side firing woofers can increase driver area in a narrow tower but it will increase the depth so not every application can handle that extra space requirement.

Subwoofers cross over at 80Hz or lower usually. This leaves all but the last octave of 4-string bass guitar up to the mains and if the crossover happens at 40Hz (not uncommon at all) then the entire 4-string bass guitar comes through the mains. Even 15" woofers in the mains, crossed over at 80Hz, will still be reproducing bass and the larger drivers will help to reproduce it efficiently at high SPL.

Driver surface area usually cannot exceed one wavelength without causing beaming. This is one reason why tweeters tend to be small and even then their dispersion is far from omnidirectional. It is also why multiple tweeters are unpopular (except maybe in line arrays) since they can not only cause beaming, they can also cause phase cancellation comb filtering that varies as a function of off-axis angle because the distinct drivers are a wavelength or more apart.

Arrays of multiple drivers have a diffuse patchwork sound that does not coalesce into a full blend until the listening distance is several feet away at least. Side firing woofers are more susceptible. It is generally a bad idea to sit right next to a speaker with multiple identical drivers or many band-limited drivers e.g. 3-way, 4-way...

Even a bookshelf speaker with 2 way drivers can have a 15" driver. These comments have nothing to do with tower or bookshelf, except when discussing typical speakers. That is one reason the comments confused me a little. There is huge variation and all these physical principles apply regardless of the type of speaker system.

What you need to ask yourself is what your goals are. All else being equal, how much SPL in how big a space with how much sound treatment? Amplification available/budgeted? How much room for cabinets, stands? How many channels? That will help you decide which speakers are appropriate for your application, with the aid of some expert advice (but not from me since I know little about actual models available today and I ain't no expert).

Many other comments about needing this or that to do a job do not make sense to me. It all depends on your goals.
bluewizard likes this.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #28 of 29 Old 11-17-2014, 08:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked: 323
EDIT: Dang it, I counted the efficiency gain twice and got the numbers wrong. Sorry. Fixed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
If Twin Mid are wired in Series, then the sound output is identical to a single driver. But, each driver is driven half as hard, and will handle double the power.
Umm... not exactly correct. Series doubles the impedance and halves the input power to the whole array for a decrease of 3dB, but having twice the area of driver adds back the 3dB due to increased efficiency so the net effect would seem to be no change in output. Actually, co-locating the drivers together (within less than a wavelength total array dimension) is what adds the 3dB (similar to having a larger speaker) for a net 0dB gain in output level... all else being equal. Of course tweaks in the crossover to match levels with other drivers in the system, or tailor frequency response curves, or even out impedance anomalies, might steal back some of the gains.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
If Twin Mid are wired in Parallel, there will be an increased output, but then you tend to have impedance problems. About the best you can do is two 8 ohms in parallel for a resulting impedance of 4 ohms. That's not terrible, most amps can easily handle 4 ohms, especially in the midrange. But it is a design consideration.
Correct as far as it goes. In this case there is a 3dB gain due to double the power (if the amp will drive double the power into half the impedance) plus 3dB for double the area of driver from co-location for a total of 6dB, an impressive near-doubling of perceived loudness (OK 1.5 times). The efficiency of the drivers themselves is identical in both series or parallel connection but in addition to the difference in the way the amp is loaded, there are also differences in the matching to the other drivers. A totally different crossover network and/or different impedance choice of one or more drivers might be in order. For any given combination of drivers it might be feasible or impractical to implement one or both of the two choices and a simple single driver might be the only option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
There two common 3-way designs -

The older Woofer, Mid-Range, Tweeter designs.

But modern speakers take a slightly difference approach. They are Low-Bas, Mid-Bass, Tweeter designs. Typically these use larger Mid-Bass drivers, which is one clue as to the design.
Not sure which world you grew up in, but my recollection is that the good old days of speaker design included such innovations as the Ohm 1 omnidirectional full range driver, some interesting omnidirectional piezoelectric(?) film tweeters, transmission line designs, electrostatics, ionizing air tweeters, etc. etc. etc. including plenty of 4, 5, and 6 way designs plus every conceivable variation on the theme.

Calling a speaker a 'low bass' or 'mid bass' is rather pointless. The spectrum is linear. It is not quantized. My brother-in-law built a set of Speakerlab bookshelf systems in the 1970s with 4 different sized cone drivers ranging up to 12" that sounded nearly as good as anything I have heard today in the lower professional grade (even with no subwoofer), and they were budget models from a DIY company but still pricey in today's dollars. For enough money he could have purchased just about any speaker system equivalent to today's, with maybe the exception of dome tweeters and aluminum or composite woofers that might be later innovations.

The change is that the oddball technologies have been phased out and the winners are now concentrating on bringing the advances of computer-automated design and simulation to consumers on a wide scale. One of those advances is far easier tuning of crossovers and ported cabinets as well as tweaking drivers, so some of the more 'esoteric' driver frequency band choices are becoming available to the average person. The tradeoffs between size and efficiency are being optimized in a far more intelligent fashion, allowing the creation of narrow towers with good efficiency, frequency response and dispersion without taking over the living room and powerful subwoofers that do not sound like someone banging on an oil drum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
Because I'm a bit old school, I like big Bass Drivers. I come from an age when dinosaurs roamed the earth and the average kid on the street had speakers with 12" woofers. If you had 8" woofers you were considered an amateur in the world of music listening. Today, you would be very luck to even find woofers larger than 8". Though admittedly most speakers with 8" woofers have TWIN 8" woofers in each box.
Guess I must be old school. I had stereo/quadraphonic systems with 4 6" or 1 8" or 1 12" stereo woofers and 4 pairs of 12" guitar speakers plus 400 watts of amp and cheezy receiver plus mechanical delay line surround synthesis that I built myself from surplus junk before I became an adult.

Now I have 2 10" subs and 6 towers with dual 8" or single 10" woofers plus bookshelves/dipoles/centers with 5" woofers and satellites with 3" woofers and it is many decades later. I also gifted similar equipment to family and friends when a bargain too good to pass up on the used market floated by, basically doubling the product that passed through my hands. I have probably forgotten as many speakers I once owned as others have owned in their entire lives.

Most of what I had/have was used or junked and I brought it back to life and that is the only way I could afford this hobby given my circumstances. The major difference in these systems/speakers is the quality in every aspect improved dramatically and the cost plummeted with time.

I am just not getting the connection to 'mid bass' though, nor am I getting the connection to 'old school' big woofers. I always prefer speakers that match the room they are in. I would be no happier with tiny tower woofers in a huge room than I would with 15" headphones. It is all a matter of perspective and in my experience the best sound always comes from a system that matches its environment.

My preferred listening environment for enjoyment of acoustic music is a huge slightly live room with huge and efficient loud speakers of simple yet elegant design. My preferred listening environment for home theater, electrified music, and television is a plush carpeted dead living room with comfortable furniture and a powerful full-frequency surround system. My preferred listening environment for mixing a self-produced album is a small dead studio room with modestly sized nearfield monitors and a set of accurate headphones to do the fine tweaking.

It all depends on what you are after.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
Just as a point of interest, here is some information I gathered about the relative size of various bass drivers. This can help you determine the equivalent of 3x6.5" bass drivers.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-spe...-vs-those.html

For example, 1x6.5" has a relative value of 2.64, so 3x6.5" would have a relative value of 3 x 2.64 = 7.92
This is a wonderful idea and I am really glad you did this. It would be a fine 'consumer reports' sort of speaker metric, if it caught on.

Last edited by CherylJosie; 11-17-2014 at 08:23 PM. Reason: Mathematical error
CherylJosie is offline  
post #29 of 29 Old 11-19-2014, 09:44 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
iduhfuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay, thank you all for the responses. I believe that clarifies a lot of the unknown to me.
iduhfuse is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off