How to Choose a Loudspeaker -- What the Science Shows - Page 74 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 5574Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2191 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 06:05 AM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_unit View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
So, based on these measurements, how does this speaker look?
It looks like I'm not convinced the measurements are "good"-I do not mean that in any offensive way, it's that some waviness makes me feel like you either have not a very long enough reflection-free time or you have not excluded the reflections.

Understand that a setup with 1 ms = 343 Hz of truly reflection free time, does NOT mean all the data above 343 Hz is OK. It means ideally getting a valid data point every 343 Hz IIRC. Hence peaks and dips that are really processing/algorithm artifacts, plus there is windowing applied to the data yada yada yada...and that measurement setup isn't really good below maybe 2 kHz. Even above that I *think* the rippling might continue every 343 Hz? Someone else wade in, I haven't thought about this in a long time.

You need to get out a tape measure and physically measure your measuring space. Post some pictures and we can help you figure out how much reflection-free space you really have, because that can be tricky to figure out.

I once had a setup in a drop ceiling tile, microphone 1 meter down from the 2.44 meter (8 foot) ceiling. This meant the floor reflection came [(2.44x2)-1]=3.88 meters after the direct wave. Take 3.88/(343 m/s)=0.0113 seconds --> 88 Hz. Up near the ceiling this required a clear area of about 2.4something meters radius.
Interesting comments, thank you.

I really don't think I am measuring in an optimal environment. I figured I would just try it out and see what it looks like. But the larger ripples in my measurements do seem to share similarities to other quasi-aneochoic measurements that I see on some other websites (Stereophile, Sound and Vision).

https://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-measurements

On a other note, I was out for a walk this morning. Dr. Toole, does the landscape look familiar at all?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	BFB09925-7FFC-48CE-8136-E3FC187A9FB8_1551967483871.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	138.3 KB
ID:	2535618  
avkv likes this.

Last edited by buckchester; 03-07-2019 at 06:10 AM.
buckchester is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2192 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 06:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scotth3886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: New Albany, OH
Posts: 7,919
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3833 Post(s)
Liked: 2350
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Without a doubt. No argument there.


My experience with Klipsch, Hsu, and some JBL PA systems has been the opposite. The limited dispersion in the upper mids (around the crossover) makes it feel like my ears need to pop or that I have some kind of sinus pressure like being on a plane. It's like I'm wearing headphones that I can't take off. Also, fwiw, I don't equate dynamics with loudness. It's more about the difference between the softest and loudest sounds, regardless of max SPL.

So much to agree with above.

It's hard to describe but I'm apparently very sensitive to the rapid acoustic SPL changes from the horn. It's not a pleasant experience for me, but many people love them, and are less sensitive to the effect. I've also never heard any state-of-the-art horn system or any state-of-the-art system for that matter.

Well actually, if you count the top-of-the-line(?) QSC system I've heard at my local Alamo Drafthouse, then I guess those might count. They sound very loud and clear, but you could still tell that there were "horns" behind that screen. Not something I'd want to listen to all day to relax.

That said, from what I've read, one's preferred dispersion characteristics is indeed a personal choice, and most people prefer wider dispersion to narrower, but that depends on room and individual tastes. I respect the things horns do well, but they aren't really for me (and I certainly haven't heard all of them so my experience is very limited.)
Of local small performance venues around here, talking about Natalie's in Worthington and Brother Drakes near OSU campus, one uses QSCs and the other JBLs, but both are obnoxious enough that I'm not going back.
Scotth3886 is online now  
post #2193 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 06:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMovieNut View Post
I believe the main purpose of the "thing" is to protect the tweeter, and therefore humans around it, from accidental damage. Beryllium is nasty stuff.


Cheers,

OldMovieNut
The lens widens dispersion in the high treble as 1" tweeters tend to 'beam' somewhat.
donktard likes this.
TimVG is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2194 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 07:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Interesting comments, thank you.

I really don't think I am measuring in an optimal environment. I figured I would just try it out and see what it looks like. But the larger ripples in my measurements do seem to share similarities to other quasi-aneochoic measurements that I see on some other websites (Stereophile, Sound and Vision).

https://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-measurements

On a other note, I was out for a walk this morning. Dr. Toole, does the landscape look familiar at all?
Your measurements were fine, you gated properly, at least the last ones i saw. But you are limited with what you can do, especially if you measure complete system compared to individual driver where you could sum nearfield and farfield measurements (and avoid areas where such measurements are incorrect).


As for the ripples, its nothing surprising, not all drivers are flat and they are affected by cabined design. Golden ear you linked has narrow baffle with no roundover and MTM configuration, both of which in most cases cause dramatic diffraction in tweeter response. Mids are not spared either because of narrow baffle and that can be easily seen in response. That speaker needs a nice fat 1" radius roundover to get some improvement.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
post #2195 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 07:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
It's certainly not impossible.
Ok once again, that's my only point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
However, even on the models that measure well, and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker with an optimal waveguide.
Except I've already posted an example to the contrary. I'm sure there are many others. Why the need to belabor? Look at the graphs and tell me which has a bigger "hole," as you call it. The one with or without the waveguide? Both look perfectly smooth to me unless you are just being pedantic, in which case, carry on.

It's the design goal, as prescribed by Toole, et al. (flat on-axis, smooth off), that's far more important than the specific implementation, and is, in fact, the entire thesis of this thread (or so I thought...)

And again, my point, which should be good news for everyone interested in good sound at all price points, is that the design goal being discussed can be easily implemented using very conventional means and without proprietary waveguides are anything of the like. A simple 6.5 inch 2-way box can meet all the necessary goals without issue and can do so by using conventional off-the-shelf components.

I, for one, think that's important to realize and gives me even more hope for future designs that will begin to recognize Toole's work. It's just a matter of choosing to do so, and nothing more.

And also, just one last thing, it's important to remember that far off-axis performance is not the primary factor in determining good sound and in some cases is mostly irrelevant. Nailing the on-axis curve will get you 90% of the way there.
steven59 likes this.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 08:03 AM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2196 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 07:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
Rick Craig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Actually, the old CR ratings were totally based on measurements (the wrong ones) and a calculation based on faulty interpretation of old psychoacoustic data. The problem was that they did not do blind or double-blind listening on the products they rated. If they had done so, I expect that they would have discovered the problem and modified their program. I visited them many years ago and saw where they did their original listening tests to "prove" their method. It was a large acoustically live room filled with folding chairs.

Around 1985 I held a loudspeaker measurement seminar at the NRCC in Ottawa. It was attended by a Who's Who of loudspeaker science and technology. Included were two engineers from CR. During the event I showed a slide of ratings of four loudspeakers as they scored them and as they were scored in my double-blind listening tests. The correlation was -0.76, meaning that readers should invert the CR page of ratings to better see what the relative sound qualities were. The CR engineers were not motivated to change anything, which was disappointing - business is business, I guess. Only when, many years later, Sean Olive published his findings in AES sessions did they take the criticism seriously, and cease testing loudspeakers. His results on a group of 13 loudspeakers that had been rated in CR again indicated a negative correlation with double-blind listening tests (-0.22) and no statistical significance (p=0.46). The highest rated loudspeaker in the double-blind tests was their lowest rated speaker. Others were all over the place. In contrast, Olive's algorithm for processing spinorama data to predict subjective ratings showed a correlation coefficient of 0.995 (p < 0.0001) - near perfection.

To their credit they hired a bright young man to upgrade their process, but it did not reach completion. I sensed that they were reluctant to attribute any credit for a better process to a manufacturer, in spite of the fact that the core science originated while I was a government employee at the NRCC in Canada. Sigh . . .

A few years ago, when CU was asking for money - an annual event - I wrote a calm letter describing all this and suggesting a way forward. If done properly they could provide a service to consumers that is not otherwise available. No response.
Floyd - thanks so much for being here! In the last few years I have worked on some projects with Don Keele and I know he's a fan too. How do you think the Klippel nearfield scanner compares to doing anechoic measurements? Would it be more accurate for low frequency information?

Selah Audio

Thinking Inside the Box...
Rick Craig is offline  
post #2197 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 07:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: London, ON, Canada
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Dr. Toole, thanks for you reply concerning differences between the M2s and Salon 2s.

It is indeed unfortunate (for me) that you have misplaced, not lost, the key to your 1986 AES article. I still own at least 2 pairs of the speakers in it and wondered how they faired. The best are still pretty good.

I appreciate that one of the advantages of the Salon 2s is low frequency extension, but I wonder if Harmon has considered releasing a more modest model that has the diffraction characteristics of them, meaning I guess the shaped baffle, without the low bass capabilities, since to optimize bass, one needs multiple subs, and the bass capabilities of the Salon 2s is redundant.
Elkerton is offline  
post #2198 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 08:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post

Except I've already posted an example to the contrary. I'm sure there are many others. Why the need to belabor? Look at the graphs and tell me which has a bigger "hole," as you call it. The one with or without the waveguide? Both look perfectly smooth to me unless you are just being pedantic, in which case, carry on.
You have in fact not posted examples. For total sound power we need more than a few horizontal off axis plots, which you posted. We need measurements that measure sound radiated in every direction - 72 measurements which then need to processed according to the ANSI 2034 standard.
TimVG is offline  
post #2199 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 08:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
You have in fact not posted examples. For total sound power we need more than a few horizontal off axis plots, which you posted. We need measurements that measure sound radiated in every direction - 72 measurements which then need to processed according to the ANSI 2034 standard.
So, you are asserting that only ANSI 2034 measurements can be discussed? Seems overly restrictive for an internet forum. If that's the case, I guess the conversation stops here, unless you'd like to post your own examples which you've obviously seen, to be able draw your various conclusions here.

So go ahead and post those examples so we can all learn together and discuss them, thanks.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 08:13 AM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2200 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 08:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
So, you are asserting that only ANSI 2034 measurements can be discussed? Seems a little restrictive. If that's the case, I guess the conversation stops here, unless you'd like to post your own examples which you've obviously seen, to be able draw your various conclusions here.

So go ahead and post those examples so we can all learn together and discuss them, thanks.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when I mention total sound power, and you counter with horizontal off-axis plots, that they are not enough in terms of information, they don't encompass total sound power.

What I did say was:

"However, even on the models that measure well (without waveguide), and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker (with the same 6,5" woofer) with an optimal waveguide. It's just physics." And I stand by that especially as mid/woofer size increases - I've clarified some things between brackets.

Further elaborated by @Floyd Toole in post #2149 as a response to your post with the measurements from stereophile and soundstage.
TimVG is offline  
post #2201 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 09:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
I'm saying that when I mention total sound power, and you counter with horizontal off-axis plots, that they are not enough in terms of information, they don't encompass total sound power.
I agree that more information is better, but we don't have that information, so I guess we don't have a conversation either. What we do have is an apples-to-apples comparison, albeit imperfect, something you haven't provided at all to further your own assertion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
What I did say was:

"However, even on the models that measure well (without waveguide), and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker (with the same 6,5" woofer) with an optimal waveguide. It's just physics." And I stand by that especially as mid/woofer size increases - I've clarified some things between brackets.
Well that statement is without proof, evidence, or examples. When you provide such, I guess we can talk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Further elaborated by @Floyd Toole in post #2149 as a response to your post with the measurements from stereophile and soundstage.
And you are editorializing his words. I think that's bad form on your part. His actual words:

"The need for a waveguide is entirely determined by comprehensive anechoic measurements of the specific woofer and the specific tweeter in the specific enclosure."

IOW, waveguides aren't always necessary since it entirely depends on anechoic measurements of the whole system, which is the only point I've been trying to make. In absence of that data, you can't really make your claim.

Your words:

"However, even on the models that measure well (without waveguide), and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker (with the same 6,5" woofer) with an optimal waveguide. It's just physics."

One thing isn't like the other. So please, post your proof of this thesis so we can all educate ourselves.
dowop likes this.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 09:10 AM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2202 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 09:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
I agree that more information is better, but we don't have that information, so I guess we don't have a conversation either. What we do have is an apples-to-apples comparison, albeit imperfect, something you haven't provided at all to further your own assertion.



Well that statement is without proof, evidence, or examples. When you provide such, I guess we can talk.



And you are editorializing his words. I think that's bad form on your part. His actual words:

"The need for a waveguide is entirely determined by comprehensive anechoic measurements of the specific woofer and the specific tweeter in the specific enclosure."

IOW, waveguides aren't always necessary since it entirely depends on anechoic measurements of the whole system, which is the only point I've been trying to make. In absence of that data, you can't really make your claim.

Your words:

"However, even on the models that measure well (without waveguide), and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker (with the same 6,5" woofer) with an optimal waveguide. It's just physics."

One thing isn't like the other. So please, post your proof of this thesis so we can all educate ourselves.
One would need the same loudspeaker with and without waveguide to provide an apples to apples comparison, which I do not have.
The proof is in the pudding however. The best measuring loudspeakers, feature a waveguide, because of physics.
Waveguides are usueful tools in controlling dispersion of a small radiating source such as a 1" dome at frequencies where it would normally disperse sound in a very wide pattern, especially when trying to cross it over as seemless as possible to a much larger radiating surface, and this in all directions. Surely this makes sense to you.
If there is one person who has access to the data you seek however, then it's @avkv and I hope he can provide you with the answer you seek. If a waveguide would not be a substantial improvement, people wouldn't bother with them and they would have been discarded long ago. Waveguides are not a fad.
TimVG is offline  
post #2203 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 10:48 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 781 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Interesting comments, thank you.

I really don't think I am measuring in an optimal environment. I figured I would just try it out and see what it looks like. But the larger ripples in my measurements do seem to share similarities to other quasi-aneochoic measurements that I see on some other websites (Stereophile, Sound and Vision).

https://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-measurements

On a other note, I was out for a walk this morning. Dr. Toole, does the landscape look familiar at all?
Ah yes, I remember it well. In Ottawa we had a 350 ft driveway that for many years I kept clear with a riding tractor snowblower, later deferring to a FWD snowplow. Bundling up in a snowmobile suit/down-filled parka was never a pleasure. I was younger then, and winter activities -skiing and skating - were great fun, but life in SoCal is just right for this stage of life

Mind you the last wildfire almost got us, and earthquakes are an omnipresent possibility. So, pick your poison.
avkv and filecat13 like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2204 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 11:08 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 781 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Craig View Post
Floyd - thanks so much for being here! In the last few years I have worked on some projects with Don Keele and I know he's a fan too. How do you think the Klippel nearfield scanner compares to doing anechoic measurements? Would it be more accurate for low frequency information?
I have great respect for Wolfgang Klippel and his devices - he worked at Harman for while and we became friends. I have no experience with the near-field scanner - it came along after my retirement. It seems like a very useful device for large pro-audio gear where far-field data are hard to get. Smaller consumer speakers are much less challenging.

As for accuracy at low frequencies, a calibrated anechoic chamber can replicate results on a 10 m tower or ground plane data within a dB or so down to 20-30 Hz, so I'm not sure where you think the problem is. I discussed somewhere in one of these forums the issues with large towers, which may require repositioning for a second measurement and some curve splicing, but these are simple low-cost solutions.

Given the propagation path through standing-wave filled rooms high precision in such data is not a requirement - in situ EQ of some form is pretty much essential.
avkv likes this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2205 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 11:10 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 781 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkerton View Post
Dr. Toole, thanks for you reply concerning differences between the M2s and Salon 2s.

It is indeed unfortunate (for me) that you have misplaced, not lost, the key to your 1986 AES article. I still own at least 2 pairs of the speakers in it and wondered how they faired. The best are still pretty good.

I appreciate that one of the advantages of the Salon 2s is low frequency extension, but I wonder if Harmon has considered releasing a more modest model that has the diffraction characteristics of them, meaning I guess the shaped baffle, without the low bass capabilities, since to optimize bass, one needs multiple subs, and the bass capabilities of the Salon 2s is redundant.
You are not the first to think of this . It is a decision for Kevin Voecks.
krabapple and SDX-LV like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2206 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 11:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
One would need the same loudspeaker with and without waveguide to provide an apples to apples comparison, which I do not have.
And yet you claim absolute knowledge on the subject, hmmm. See the problem? That's not how science works. So you don't know at all and your claim is baseless, even contradicting Toole. Got it. You are making generalizations for things you haven't seen yourself nor provided any 3rd-party corroboration.

Just saying something doesn't make it true.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 11:54 AM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2207 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
And yet you claim absolute knowledge on the subject, hmmm. See the problem? That's not how science works. So you don't know at all and your claim is baseless, even contradicting Toole. Got it. You are making generalizations for things you haven't seen yourself nor provided any 3rd-party corroboration.



Just saying something doesn't make it true.
You are either completely misinterpreting my posts, or failing to comprehend them altogether. Good thing we have an ignore function.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk
TimVG is offline  
post #2208 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
You are either completely misinterpreting my posts, or failing to comprehend them altogether. Good thing we have an ignore function.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk
People can make up their own minds and I've made my point clear enough. It's not my responsibility to comprehend inane posts. I don't see anyone coming to bat for you on this so...take care?

Maybe now we can get back to talking about measurements and other design choices...sorry for all the hot air, everyone.
dowop, Scotth3886 and SouthernCA like this.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 12:11 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2209 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
People can make up their own minds and I've my points clear enough. It's not my responsibility to comprehend inane posts. I don't see anyone coming to bat for you on this so...take care?
I guess that's why Revel is so proud of not needing waveguides. Oh wait.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk
TimVG is offline  
post #2210 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
I guess that's why Revel is so proud of not needing waveguides. Oh wait.
Ah ok. There it is. Now I get it and it all makes sense now. It's the ol' "But Revel does it so there is no other way" one-true-way defense. This is despite Toole saying that there are many valid ways to do things. Well, I certainly won't ever be able to crack that particular nut. For me it's purely: no proof, no care.

There's no reasoning with brand identification and expectation bias.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 12:25 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2211 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
No need to get your feathers in a ruffle, guys. Waveguides are ubiquitous now. There are plenty available even for DIY'ers, but it's just one design choice out of many in a speaker system.

I've even heard folks refer to a flat baffle as a 180 degree waveguide.
DS-21 and chikoo like this.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is online now  
post #2212 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Ah ok. There it is. Now I get it and it all makes sense now. It's the ol' "But Revel does it so there is no other way" one-true-way defense. This is despite Toole saying that there are many valid ways to do things. Well, I certainly won't ever be able to crack that particular nut. For me it's purely: no proof, no care.

There's no reasoning with brand identification and expectation bias.
Waveguides are useful - it is science. There are many ways of doing things indeed. However, coupling a 1" tweeter to a 6,5" midwoofer, without the use of a waveguide, and expecting no influence whatsoever on the Sound Power DI compared to a model with an optimised waveguide, is not brand bias. Waveguides are mathematically proven. Maybe Floyd Toole will comment on this, or not.

You accuse me of me of brand bias, yet it's clear you own a monitor with a 1" tweeter without a waveguide, coupled to a 6,5" midwoofer, among other :-) You're trying to justify your product which is fine, I never said it could not be a good loudspeaker.

My big Revels are pre-waveguide. They have a rear firing tweeter to even out the sound power response.
TimVG is offline  
post #2213 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
No need to get your feathers in a ruffle, guys. Waveguides are ubiquitous now. There are plenty available even for DIY'ers, but it's just one design choice out of many in a speaker system.

I've even heard folks refer to a flat baffle as a 180 degree waveguide.
Yes, and that was my original point of posting the stereophile article. I thought it would interesting to everybody to share the excellent measurements of a conventional non-waveguided 6.5 inch 2-way with a common 2.5kHz crossover. Something many people have claimed was impossible or even "flawed."

I received some really good info from Toole and I was very thankful for that. And all was good until the Revel brigade showed up to pounce on me, lol.

To me, it all depends on the overall system and there is no one-true-way. All we need is more, and more comprehensive measurements. So, I'm a big Harman fan and I'm rooting for them, but I could do without all the true-believers who make any technical discussion tedious.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2214 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 12:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Waveguides are useful - it is science. There are many ways of doing things indeed. However, coupling a 1" tweeter to a 6,5" midwoofer, without the use of a waveguide, and expecting no influence whatsoever on the Sound Power DI compared to a model with an optimised waveguide, is not brand bias.
I never said there wouldn't be an influence and I like waveguides just fine. I'm asking a question and showed an example that didn't need one and looked just as good as one with. That's it. If the measurements aren't sufficient to reach a valid conclusion, so be it. The question can remain an open one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Waveguides are mathematically proven.
Of course they are, and for this reason they are not always necessary or sometimes the "180 degree waveguide" is best and can be predicted mathematically. Waveguides control down to a certain frequency and most fail to reach the crossover point anyway. So in sum, it depends, which is my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
You accuse me of me of brand bias, yet it's clear you own a monitor with a 1" tweeter without a waveguide, coupled to a 6,5" midwoofer, among other :-) You're trying to justify your product which is fine, I never said it could not be a good loudspeaker.
Absolute pure nonsense and total fabrication. I own Dynaudio because they are the closest dealer to me and I received a good deal on them. I have owned and enjoyed many speakers with waveguides and without, including Harman. I have never stated that Dynaudio is better than Harman and I have been very critical of their design choices if you care to read my posts in the Dynaudio thread.

You have no idea what you're talking about this has nothing to do with Dynaudio at all.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 01:02 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2215 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post

Absolute pure nonsense and total fabrication. I own Dynaudio because they are the closest dealer to me and I received a good deal on them. I have owned and enjoyed many speakers with waveguides and without, including Harman. I have never stated that Dynaudio is better than Harman and I have been very critical of their design choices if you care to read my posts in the Dynaudio thread.

You have no idea what you're talking about this has nothing to do with Dynaudio at all.
What is absolutely nonsense and total fabrication? You do not own such a loudspeaker then?

As I said before, you misinterpret my posts and try to see the worst in it, or as some sort of personal attack - which is not my intention at all.

You write: I never said there wouldn't be an influence. I'm asking a question and showed an example that didn't need one and looked just as good as one with. That's it.

I originally replied, some pages back: we need more measurements to verify this (total sound power) yet I'd be surprised if there would not be an influence.

So.. we agree, sort of, then?
TimVG is offline  
post #2216 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 8,099
Mentioned: 147 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3669 Post(s)
Liked: 2874
@l0nestar8 and @TimVG , you seem to be having a running feud that's starting to get personal based on different interpretations of what you think @Floyd Toole has stated on the subject. It would help get the thread back on focus if you could just summarize the point of your disagreement in neutral terms and ask @Floyd Toole to clarify the intent of his previous comments on the subject since he's already active in this thread.
Dave in Green is offline  
post #2217 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
What is absolutely nonsense and total fabrication? You do not own such a loudspeaker then?

As I said before, you misinterpret my posts and try to see the worst in it, or as some sort of personal attack - which is not my intention at all.

You write: I never said there wouldn't be an influence. I'm asking a question and showed an example that didn't need one and looked just as good as one with. That's it.

I originally replied, some pages back: we need more measurements to verify this (total sound power) yet I'd be surprised if there would not be an influence.

So.. we agree, sort of, then?
On that part, absolutely. I even agreed with Toole earlier, as well. I do own Dynaudio and many other speakers as well. I have preferred others more, and they aren't perfect, so I don't see the point here.

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2218 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
My point is simple. If you're looking to couple a 6,5" midwoofer to a 1" tweeter, you will have a better chance of matching the directivity through the crossover using a well implemented waveguide preferably combined with a higher order crossover topology.
Even if you manage to produce a loudspeaker, minus waveguide, that behaves itself from the former combination, you will be left with narrower dispersion throughout the crossover, and likely a larger dip in the total sound power DI. I base this statement on physics, and in general terms as the variables are many.
Rex Anderson likes this.
TimVG is offline  
post #2219 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 589 Post(s)
Liked: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
@l0nestar8 and @TimVG , you seem to be having a running feud that's starting to get personal based on different interpretations of what you think @Floyd Toole has stated on the subject. It would help get the thread back on focus if you could just summarize the point of your disagreement in neutral terms and ask @Floyd Toole to clarify the intent of his previous comments on the subject since he's already active in this thread.
I sincerely hope it's not a feud but instead a lively discussion. Apologies to the entire thread for the derail, but I do find this interesting, and I thought my questions were respectful.

As to my point, based on a recent set of measurements, I was asking the question whether a conventional waveguide is always necessary, to which, Toole already responded and I thanked him for such. I believe TimVG has proposed that a waveguide will always outperform one without, given the same woofer, to which I asked for some sort of source or really anything beyond: "That's how Revel does it." Personally, I will just take Toole's word for it when he says:

"The need for a waveguide is entirely determined by comprehensive anechoic measurements of the specific woofer and the specific tweeter in the specific enclosure."

As opposed to:

"However, even on the models that measure well (without waveguide), and behave themselves, there is a larger hole in the sound power than you would find on an equally well designed loudspeaker (with the same 6,5" woofer) with an optimal waveguide. It's just physics."

Speakers: M040 | M16 | LS50 | Reva-2| BM5 mk3 | X28| X18 | X14
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810

Last edited by l0nestar8; 03-07-2019 at 01:26 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #2220 of 4353 Old 03-07-2019, 01:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
On that part, absolutely. I even agreed with Toole earlier, as well. I do own Dynaudio and many other speakers as well. I have preferred others more, and they aren't perfect, so I don't see the point here.
No hard feelings man, let's move on. I've summarized my thoughts in my previous post. It's funny because my new speakers don't sport a waveguide as I said, first gen. Revel Studios. I also own several other brands, there's good stuff to be found on different continents.
TimVG is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
cea 2034 , double-blind , listening tests , loudspeaker measurements , spinorama

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