AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Guys, what would happen if I would turn my horizontal center channel straight up and down behind my AT screen?

Horizontal centers struggle with big soundstage. I was told they struggle with horizontal dispersion. I don't know why.

What do you think?

I feel like my center channel sounds small...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
They have coming issues when you go extremely off axis.

On axis (right in front of it) will sound no different vertically or horizontally.

It could just be the center itself and the way that it’s voiced.

Centers can’t have a sound stage FYI.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
Guys, what would happen if I would turn my horizontal center channel straight up and down behind my AT screen?

Horizontal centers struggle with big soundstage. I was told they struggle with horizontal dispersion. I don't know why.

What do you think?

I feel like my center channel sounds small...
If you had a normal rectangular MTM or MMTMM center, it wouldn't be a problem.

Your GE XXXL however has trapezoidal sides so it would have a hard time standing up at 90 degrees.

Plus it has those silly passive radiators on only one of the sides, not sure how that would sound with the passive port energy being directed towards only the L or R side.

Is your center's tweeter at ear level? If not, you could try to tilt it upwards towards ear level, using rubber doorstop wedges.

If that doesn't help, consider getting a 3rd GE Triton for your center, if GE sells them in singles. If not, I'd use a mismatched center.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,377 Posts
If you had a normal rectangular MTM or MMTMM center, it wouldn't be a problem.

Your GE XXXL however has trapezoidal sides so it would have a hard time standing up at 90 degrees.
Standing the speaker upright on one of the non-square ends would be the biggest issue.

Plus it has those silly passive radiators on only one of the sides, not sure how that would sound with the passive port energy being directed towards only the L or R side.
Curious... what do you think is "silly" about passive radiators? They are similar to ports, as both are resonant devices tuned to a specific frequency using the backwave of the active driver to energize the ports or the PR. The primary difference is that ports can make "port noise" whereas passive radiators can suffer from cone break up and distortion. The facing direction of the PR's is immaterial as they're tuned to a low enough frequency that the dispersion is omni-directional and not perceived as directional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radiator_(speaker)

Is your center's tweeter at ear level? If not, you could try to tilt it upwards towards ear level, using rubber doorstop wedges.

If that doesn't help, consider getting a 3rd GE Triton for your center, if GE sells them in singles. If not, I'd use a mismatched center.
You forgot one very important consideration. The folded ribbon tweeter is designed for horizontal orientation. If the speaker is used vertically, the tweeter should be turned 90 degrees so it remains horizontally oriented. If the screws securing the tweeter are a perfect square, then turning the tweeter should be simple.

Overall, if the vertical CC could be turned upright and vertical, it would avoid the lobing inherent in horizontal speaker designs. This only affects the off axis seating positions, but if those are *important* seats in a theater, its worthy of consideration.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=89614
https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/vertical-vs-horizontal-speaker-designs


Craig
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
Curious... what do you think is "silly" about passive radiators?
Just an off hand remark based on my experience of listening to speakers that have them...manufacturers and salespeople like to make a big deal about them, and many newbies easily conflate them with active drivers, but I've not been much impressed with any speakers that have them.

The only application where passive radiators seem to be genuinely useful to me is cheap and tiny bluetooth speakers (I recently bought a Cambridge Audio Oontz for kitchen countertop use which has them) that try to produce comically lower bass than they should, for the bass-heavy genres so popular these days. In full sized speakers that are already crossed over to subs, they are gimmicky at best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
You forgot one very important consideration. The folded ribbon tweeter is designed for horizontal orientation. If the speaker is used vertically, the tweeter should be turned 90 degrees so it remains horizontally oriented. If the screws securing the tweeter are a perfect square, then turning the tweeter should be simple. Overall, if the vertical CC could be turned upright and vertical, it would avoid the lobing inherent in horizontal speaker designs. This only affects the off axis seating positions, but if those are *important* seats in a theater, its worthy of consideration.
True, yes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
J In full sized speakers that are already crossed over to subs, they are gimmicky at best.
Just because you don't understand how they work does not mean they are "bad"--actually, sometimes they are the only reasonable option.

To put in the simplest terms, passive radiators are "mechanical ports". Think of a tuning fork, have you've ever seen a "adjustable tuning fork?" It is a tuning fork with a weight strapped across the forks (tines?) and you adjust it up and down with the weight to change the tuning frequency. Passive radiators do the same thing, they resonate at a specific frequency (like a port does) and it is tuned with weights.

Passive radiators were theorized in the 1950's and first used by JBL in 1964 so they have been around for quite awhile. Think Polk Audio with their SDA series in the 1980's--they all used them to tune the cabinet.

Why would you use an expensive passive radiator instead of a simple port? The main reason is for very low tuning of small enclosures where a port won't fit. They are also useful if you need ported speakers in wet areas, outside areas to prevent critters from setting up house keeping or a way to prevent port overload "chuffing"

Anyone that has ever modeled a port in a small enclosure, say down below 30 Hz or lower realizes quickly that the port must be very, very long to be tuned low. Get one of those CSS SDX10 subwoofers and attempt to tune it to 20Hz in a 2.2 cubic foot box and it becomes obvious the port lenght will be very long which takes up a ton of space, demands the box becomes very large to handle such a long port and when dealing with long ports--it has it's own frequency it resonates. You don't want a port resonating on it's own at 100Hz even crossing over at 80Hz because it destroys the frequency response etc. Make the port smaller in diameter to shorten the port to prevent it resonating and it will overload quickly because the port restricts the air flow and "chuffs" The solution is to use passive radiators, generally one on either side of the box to keep them in balance and provide enough stroke to prevent damage or distortion. Generally speaking, since you need to purchase two passive radiators and they need to be long stroke (or larger diameter passive radiators) sometimes they cost more than the active subwoofer. :eek:

I know this personally, I have a 12" subwoofer tuned to 20 Hz with passive radiators--the PRs cost more than the sub. However, the cabinet I used was the perfect size for the 12 incher if I used "external ports" and my wife was not a fan. Picked up the PRs, they really don't remove internal air space like long ports do (bonus!) modeled them with software to get an idea of how much weight I needed, measured and tested--retuned a bit lower with more weight and done. You change the tuning by adding or subtracting weights and some passive radiators allow you to remove the external cap and do that without removing the device from the box. This allows simple tuning and really helps if you have other subs with different tunes to keep them about the same for better performance.

I have a boombox design sitting on my bench that will use a 2.1 channel chipamp board. A Tang Band 6.5 inch neodymium subwoofer in a 0.65 cubic foot box tuned to 29Hz works very well. The 6.5 inch sub has an Xmax of 12mm so around 1 inch of stroke so it requires a rather large port to prevent chuffing... the box size is too small, the driver dispaces too much air and lightness is required as it will be carried around. The only real option is to use two 8 inch passive radiators which gives an extra bonus, no ports for ants, spiders etc. to crawl into the boom box. Another cool oddity, ports completely unload below tuning frequency but since a PR is a physical thing--it unloads also but not completely because it must be a mass that requires force to move it. I'm not saying you don't require a high pass filter below tuning, you do but it helps.

Granted, audio salesmen really don't know what they are talking about (as usual) so why would you expect them to inform people what PRs do? Sure, they look cool because more cones increases the coolness factor and I'm sure some manufacturers spec them specifically because they look cool (KEF cough, cough) No harm in that, they have to eat but calling them "Auxilliary Bass Radiators" like it is some kind of high tech new thing is the traditional BS found in audio.

Why would they use passive radiators in bluetooth speakers? Simple, kids like watching cones move back and forth. Since passive radiators will stroke 2 to 3 times farther than an active driver--that is really COOL! Look at some car audio videos, the guy with the most cones and the longest stroke wins. :eek: Now you can sell something that is cooler that the other stuff AND it seals up the box which is a great design idea when using small, portable speakers that get exposed to rain, grass, bugs and teenagers.

In summation, PRs have been in use for the past 56 years--they are not a "gimmick" Sure, they are very, very expensive compared to a plastic tube and they must be designed right but for some uses the only option. Some people equate them to stuffing a sock in your pants--I get it but once you understand how it works--makes sense. My first speaker years ago was a 6.5 inch two-way with an 8 inch passive radiator--wonderful sounding speaker although rather large to hold the thing. These days I use passive radiators for subwoofers when ports take up too much space, I need adjustable tuning, they chuff or resonate so a nice option. I would not use them in cars, PA equipment or use them in vertical orientation but sometimes they are the perfect solution. As with everything in audio, it is always best to learn what it does before throwing it under the bus. PRs need love too! ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
Why would you use an expensive passive radiator instead of a simple port? The main reason is for very low tuning of small enclosures where a port won't fit. They are also useful if you need ported speakers in wet areas, outside areas to prevent critters from setting up house keeping or a way to prevent port overload "chuffing"

These days I use passive radiators for subwoofers when ports take up too much space, I need adjustable tuning, they chuff or resonate so a nice option. I would not use them in cars, PA equipment or use them in vertical orientation but sometimes they are the perfect solution. As with everything in audio, it is always best to learn what it does before throwing it under the bus. PRs need love too! ;)
Ok, you've made some good points and I have to admit PRs are not entirely useless. I hadn't thought of the "critters" angle either.

However, the "chuffing" part is only relevant if one is trying to make a small speaker hit much lower than it should, which again is needless in a world where most people use subs and very few need full-range performance out of their speakers.

But I do think that the reason Def Tech, KEF, and GE use them is exactly as you put it: "because they look cool" and allow for smaller, higher-WAF enclosures --- i.e. strictly for sales/marketing reasons not for any practical or acoustic advantage. Which is why they are absent in PERFORMANCE-driven designs where larger enclosures with normal ports are a much better idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
Ok, you've made some good points and I have to admit PRs are not entirely useless. I hadn't thought of the "critters" angle either.

However, the "chuffing" part is only relevant if one is trying to make a small speaker hit much lower than it should, which again is needless in a world where most people use subs and very few need full-range performance out of their speakers.

But I do think that the reason Def Tech, KEF, and GE use them is exactly as you put it: "because they look cool" and allow for smaller, higher-WAF enclosures --- i.e. strictly for sales/marketing reasons not for any practical or acoustic advantage. Which is why they are absent in PERFORMANCE-driven designs where larger enclosures with normal ports are a much better idea.
I have Klipsch Forte 111. They have a PR. I believe these speakers are more performance than the ones you constantly recommend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
I have Klipsch Forte 111. They have a PR. I believe these speakers are more performance than the ones you constantly recommend.
At $4K apiece, I would certainly hope so! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
They have coming issues when you go extremely off axis.

On axis (right in front of it) will sound no different vertically or horizontally.

It could just be the center itself and the way that it’s voiced.

Centers can’t have a sound stage FYI.
If you had a normal rectangular MTM or MMTMM center, it wouldn't be a problem.

Your GE XXXL however has trapezoidal sides so it would have a hard time standing up at 90 degrees.

Plus it has those silly passive radiators on only one of the sides, not sure how that would sound with the passive port energy being directed towards only the L or R side.

Is your center's tweeter at ear level? If not, you could try to tilt it upwards towards ear level, using rubber doorstop wedges.

If that doesn't help, consider getting a 3rd GE Triton for your center, if GE sells them in singles. If not, I'd use a mismatched center.
Standing the speaker upright on one of the non-square ends would be the biggest issue.


Curious... what do you think is "silly" about passive radiators? They are similar to ports, as both are resonant devices tuned to a specific frequency using the backwave of the active driver to energize the ports or the PR. The primary difference is that ports can make "port noise" whereas passive radiators can suffer from cone break up and distortion. The facing direction of the PR's is immaterial as they're tuned to a low enough frequency that the dispersion is omni-directional and not perceived as directional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radiator_(speaker)


You forgot one very important consideration. The folded ribbon tweeter is designed for horizontal orientation. If the speaker is used vertically, the tweeter should be turned 90 degrees so it remains horizontally oriented. If the screws securing the tweeter are a perfect square, then turning the tweeter should be simple.

Overall, if the vertical CC could be turned upright and vertical, it would avoid the lobing inherent in horizontal speaker designs. This only affects the off axis seating positions, but if those are *important* seats in a theater, its worthy of consideration.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=89614
https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/vertical-vs-horizontal-speaker-designs


Craig
I do have the center channel exactly at ear height.

As Craig knows, I have long been unhappy with my center channel. I have to just buy another Triton 1.

Interestingly, I have tried the Triton 1 as a center channel, and moved the XXL to the Left speaker. I actually liked the voicing that came out of the XXL better than the Triton 1. That's why I haven't made the purchase yet. But the XXL voices sound small to me. Ugh, I guess I'm just chasing perfection, but I don't care, I haven't been happy with the XXL center. I believe it's time to just buy another Triton 1 and use it as a center.

I am hoping that using a Triton 1 as a center will sound bigger than the XXL, and that the soundstage will integrate seamlessly which I think it would considering it's the exact same speaker. I'm also hoping that I can get used to the voicing on the Triton 1, as I said, the actual sound coming out of an XXL is clearer in the voicing range.

Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
Interestingly, I have tried the Triton 1 as a center channel, and moved the XXL to the Left speaker. I actually liked the voicing that came out of the XXL better than the Triton 1. That's why I haven't made the purchase yet. But the XXL voices sound small to me. Ugh, I guess I'm just chasing perfection, but I don't care, I haven't been happy with the XXL center. I believe it's time to just buy another Triton 1 and use it as a center.

I am hoping that using a Triton 1 as a center will sound bigger than the XXL, and that the soundstage will integrate seamlessly which I think it would considering it's the exact same speaker. I'm also hoping that I can get used to the voicing on the Triton 1, as I said, the actual sound coming out of an XXL is clearer in the voicing range.
What is it about the Triton's "voicing" that you disliked? Do you mean that the XXL simply has better VOICE CLARITY, even if it does sound a lot "smaller?"

If that is the case, I would go with a mismatched center instead and toss this "seamless soundstage" theory out the window.

Because a "seamless soundstage" is worthless if you have to "get used to" poor voice clarity when watching movies. That's putting the cart before the horse, to put it bluntly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
Ok, you've made some good points and I have to admit PRs are not entirely useless. I hadn't thought of the "critters" angle either.

However, the "chuffing" part is only relevant if one is trying to make a small speaker hit much lower than it should, which again is needless in a world where most people use subs and very few need full-range performance out of their speakers.

But I do think that the reason Def Tech, KEF, and GE use them is exactly as you put it: "because they look cool" and allow for smaller, higher-WAF enclosures --- i.e. strictly for sales/marketing reasons not for any practical or acoustic advantage. Which is why they are absent in PERFORMANCE-driven designs where larger enclosures with normal ports are a much better idea.
At $4K apiece, I would certainly hope so! :)
You mentioned PERFORMANCE. Not PRICE.

BTW, They are $4k for the pair, not each.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
You mentioned PERFORMANCE. Not PRICE.

BTW, They are $4k for the pair, not each.
My recs are 95% of the time for people who have less than half that for their entire system. Very different ballgame.

And I agree, those retro-style Klipsch are definitely performance based, since most consumers would get WAF-vetoed on them.

Amazon strangely has one listing of them for $4K apiece, which is the one my google search turned up first.
https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-1064223-Heritage-Floorstanding-American/dp/B0749RT3PL/

I can't see any difference it and the $4K/pair model:
https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-Forte-III-Heritage-Loudspeakers/dp/B0767PRLVN/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
My recs are 95% of the time for people who have less than half that for their entire system. Very different ballgame.

And I agree, those retro-style Klipsch are definitely performance based, since most consumers would get WAF-vetoed on them.

Amazon strangely has one listing of them for $4K apiece, which is the one my google search turned up first.
https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-1064223-Heritage-Floorstanding-American/dp/B0749RT3PL/

I can't see any difference it and the $4K/pair model:
https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-Forte-III-Heritage-Loudspeakers/dp/B0767PRLVN/

One is made by Tjernlund Products and weighs 6.5 pounds, the other isn’t.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
One is made by Tjernlund Products and weighs 6.5 pounds, the other isn’t.
Yes, that's the $4K apiece one...lol, Amazon listings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
I mean by Zorba’a rationale, that makes Turbocharged 4 Cylinder engines not PERFORMANCE because a larger 6 Cylinder Engine is?

Same with microchip architecture getting smaller every year.

Making stuff compact is anti performance?

This is a mind boggling argument if you ask me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,986 Posts
I mean by Zorba’a rationale, that makes Turbocharged 4 Cylinder engines not PERFORMANCE because a larger 6 Cylinder Engine is?
Wrong metaphor.

More like: making a cute little "sport" Civic that costs as much as a 500hp hulking muscle car and claims to have better performance.

Oh, and give that $60K Civic a "game changing!" proprietary, magical exhaust system. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
Wrong metaphor.

More like: making a cute little "sport" Civic that costs as much as a 500hp hulking muscle car and claims to have better performance.

Oh, and give that $60K Civic a "game changing!" proprietary, magical exhaust system. :D

Not at all. In fact your supplied metaphor is so unrelated that it makes less sense than your passive radiator argument.

Same cost, same performance, smaller size.

Try e90 330i vs e90LCi 328i.

Turbo 4 vs Naturally aspirated 6 Cyl.

Not everything in the speaker market is devilish like you make it seem. Even I don’t like DefTech but that doesn’t mean people should just condemn every passive radiator design as non performance, that’s just stupid.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top