AudioCircle

Industry Circles => Salk Signature Sound => Topic started by: David C on 1 Jan 2011, 05:31 pm

Title: RAAL tweeter
Post by: David C on 1 Jan 2011, 05:31 pm
I saw a message in one of the threads where the question of HT3s came up about them not having a RAAL tweeter? Is this true? The specs on the website indicates that they do? Confused?

Cheers
David
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Big Red Machine on 1 Jan 2011, 06:05 pm
If you want a RAAL I am sure Jim will do it for you.  My guess is no one has requested one in an HT3 as yet so he hasn't requested Dennis to develop the xover.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 1 Jan 2011, 06:29 pm
If you want a RAAL I am sure Jim will do it for you.  My guess is no one has requested one in an HT3 as yet so he hasn't requested Dennis to develop the xover.

That's my understanding as well.  I certainly haven't been asked to do one so far.  But as soon as someone orders one, I'm sure I'll get an e-mail from Jim. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: David C on 1 Jan 2011, 07:40 pm
BRM and Dennis
thanks for the responses. I wonder why no one has requested one? They seem to be the hot tweeter. I listened to some new B&W 802 diamonds and the tweeter was really harsh.... don't think they are worth the money at $16 K.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 1 Jan 2011, 08:05 pm
I'll be honest and say that the HT2-TL's with the raal sound every bit as good as the HT3's (when including price in the decision making process), so my guess is people are ordering those instead of the HT3's.  I don't mean to take sales away from the HT3's, I just think Jim, Dennis and team hit one out of the park with the HT2-TL raal, even though the HT3's have the slight upper hand.  Ymmv.

For what it's worth, I like the B&W 802Ds, but they are certainly overpriced in my opinion.  I'd take the SoundScape 10s over them any day, and at a cheaper price too.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Bill@LakeGeorge on 1 Jan 2011, 11:24 pm
I'll be honest and say that the HT2-TL's with the raal sound every bit as good as the HT3's, so my guess is people are ordering those instead of the HT3's.  I don't mean to take sales away from the HT3's, I just think Jim, Dennis and team hit one out of the park with the HT2-TL raal.  Ymmv.

For what it's worth, I like the B&W 802Ds, but they are certainly overpriced in my opinion.  I'd take the SoundScape 10s over them any day, and at a cheaper price too.

Just curious did you hear all the above speakers in your system, or at least driven by the same equipment in the same room?  Have you actually listened to all of these speakers?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: srb on 1 Jan 2011, 11:34 pm
Nuance, I wouldn't reply if you are only being allowed a one word answer!
 
Steve
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: satfrat on 2 Jan 2011, 01:12 am
Nuance, I wouldn't reply if you are only being allowed a one word answer!
 
Steve

Not the best advise you've ever given Steve, but it's probably not your worse either.  :lol:
 
Cheers,
Robin
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: srb on 2 Jan 2011, 01:27 am

Not the best advise you've ever given Steve, but it's probably not your worse either.  :lol: 

The words are advice and worst.  And some advice for you .... step off.  :lol:
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Bill@LakeGeorge on 2 Jan 2011, 01:43 am
Nuance, I wouldn't reply if you are only being allowed a one word answer!
 
Steve

I never said allowed I just said for my purposes one would suffice. :scratch:
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: satfrat on 2 Jan 2011, 01:53 am

The words are advice and worst.  And some advice for you .... step off.  :lol:

And let you be the only buttinsky? I think not!  :thumb:
 
 
Cheers,
Robin
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 3 Jan 2011, 03:21 am
Now I remember you, Bill...  Last time we disagreed you sent me a harassing pm. I'd like to avoid that kind of behavior this time.

Would I have made the post I did if I hadn't heard the speakers in question? The answer to that is no, of course. :-)

I have heard almost all of Salk's offerings. Many on this forum can attest to that. I didn't realize you owned HT3s and meant no offense. You seem upset by what I said, hence your tone.  Well, take it easy, Bill; no one is insulting your system. 


Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 3 Jan 2011, 03:24 am

Not the best advise you've ever given Steve, but it's probably not your worse either.  :lol:
 
Cheers,
Robin
Robin to the rescue, again! :)  You and Bill must be "close." :) :lol: :P
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: satfrat on 3 Jan 2011, 03:45 am
Robin to the rescue, again! :)  You and Bill must be "close." :) :lol: :P

That's funny, I was thinking the same thoughts about you and srb.  :lol:  It's a small world.  :thumb:
 
Cheers,
Robin
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 3 Jan 2011, 03:47 am
This is getting confusing.  But back to the HT3--the HT2TL does give the HT3 a run for the money in the bass department, but I think the two speakers sound noticeably different.  The midrange on the HT3 is fuller.  But I would agree the difference in quality may not be as great as the difference in price.  That's just a matter of the HT3's cabinet--it's harder to build. What I think would be cool is an HT3 with Jeff Bagby's passive radiator loading.  And the RAAL tweet, of course.  I think that would make it a more attractive option in the price break between the HT2 and SS10.  But I don't know how difficult that would be to do in the HT3's cabinet. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jbtrio on 3 Jan 2011, 04:09 am
I wouldn't agree with that statement, Nuance. At higher volume the midrange in the Ht-3's should sound cleaner, because it doesn't have to do bass duties like the HT-2 TL's, IMHO. Disclaimer, I have HT-3's but using the SEAS just for the midrange should have less distortion.

Joe
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 3 Jan 2011, 03:34 pm
Just a quick response...

The HT3's will be available with the RAAL tweeter.  We already list it that way on the site, although we have not delivered any with the RAAL tweeter as of yet.  All orders placed from this point forward will have the RAAL (unless customers request otherwise).

As for Dennis' idea of using Jeff Bagby's radiator version of the woofer section, it is considerably deeper than the current HT3 woofer section.  So building it this way would require changing to a two-piece design and it would end up costing only slightly less than the SoundScapes.  I'm not sure people would opt for the HT3's under this scenario since the SoundScapes would only cost a bit more.  But we are certainly open to doing it.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Tone Depth on 3 Jan 2011, 05:04 pm
Jim,

Is there any benefit or drawback to internally isolating the midrange from the woofer in the HT3, and separately porting the mid also out the back?


Just a quick response...

The HT3's will be available with the RAAL tweeter.  We already list it that way on the site, although we have not delivered any with the RAAL tweeter as of yet.  All orders placed from this point forward will have the RAAL (unless customers request otherwise).

As for Dennis' idea of using Jeff Bagby's radiator version of the woofer section, it is considerably deeper than the current HT3 woofer section.  So building it this way would require changing to a two-piece design and it would end up costing only slightly less than the SoundScapes.  I'm not sure people would opt for the HT3's under this scenario since the SoundScapes would only cost a bit more.  But we are certainly open to doing it.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 3 Jan 2011, 05:29 pm

That's funny, I was thinking the same thoughts about you and srb.  :lol:  It's a small world.  :thumb:
 
Cheers,
Robin

LOL, touche.  Although, I don't know him very well.  I don't know most of you well, actually.  I do know that you have a great sense of humor, though, Robin.  You're a fun dude.

I wouldn't agree with that statement, Nuance. At higher volume the midrange in the Ht-3's should sound cleaner, because it doesn't have to do bass duties like the HT-2 TL's, IMHO. Disclaimer, I have HT-3's but using the SEAS just for the midrange should have less distortion.

Joe

Oh I agree.  I honestly did think the HT3's were a bit better, but when you factor in cost the HT2-TL's become equal, at least to me.  I should have really clarified that the HT3's do have an overall better sounding midrange and bass response, but the difference is subtle (midrange).  Now, throw in the RAAL tweeter on the HT2-TL's (the 3's don't have it yet), and you're comparing apples to apples again from 100Hz and up.  Considering the price differenc, I'd take the HT2-TL's; that's really all I meant.  Sorry for the confusion gents.

I modified my original post, fellas. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 3 Jan 2011, 07:13 pm
Jim,

Is there any benefit or drawback to internally isolating the midrange from the woofer in the HT3, and separately porting the mid also out the back?



Actually, the woofer and midrange in the HT3's are internally isolated.  The midrange is in a sealed section and the woofer is in another ported section.  There is no need for a port on the midrange since it is only doing midrange duty and the driver naturally rolls off under those frequencies in a sealed cabinet.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Vulcan00 on 3 Jan 2011, 08:47 pm
I  hope I dont step on any feelings but my opinion is i would like to see a complete redesign of the HT3 cabinet, something with a little more rage , on the edge, with the leader in high quality wood finishing.

For me, upgrading to a new improved HT3, would be affordable.


Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 3 Jan 2011, 10:05 pm
I  hope I dont step on any feelings but my opinion is i would like to see a complete redesign of the HT3 cabinet, something with a little more rage , on the edge, with the leader in high quality wood finishing.

For me, upgrading to a new improved HT3, would be affordable.




Any idea of what that might look like?

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: fsimms on 3 Jan 2011, 11:22 pm

(http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1008avind.jpg)

Quote
Any idea of what that might look like?

You got that new fancy saw although how one would veneer that sucker to your standards, I don't know.   :lol:

Bob
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 3 Jan 2011, 11:24 pm
Jim,

I don't mind the look of the HT3's at all, but would something more like this be doable by chance?  A lot of folks (myself included) love the slender width but longer sides.  A side-mounted woofer like the SoundScape's would be necessary, though.


(http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/lasvegas2009/jan10a/vandersteen_seven.jpg)

(http://cdn0.magazines.me/photos/photos/12003/IMG_3709.jpg)

Jim, you're the master of this trade IMO, so no matter what you chose for future designs I have no doubt the sound quality will be top notch.  I truly look forward to what Salk Sound produces in the future.



Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 3 Jan 2011, 11:52 pm
As for Dennis' idea of using Jeff Bagby's radiator version of the woofer section, it is considerably deeper than the current HT3 woofer section.  So building it this way would require changing to a two-piece design and it would end up costing only slightly less than the SoundScapes.  I'm not sure people would opt for the HT3's under this scenario since the SoundScapes would only cost a bit more.  But we are certainly open to doing it.
- Jim

I thought the cabinet would be a problem, but I wasn't really thinking of plumbing the depths all the way to 18 Hz.  I was wondering whether you could use smaller slaves--10"--and still have enough cabinet volume to reach the high 20's.  It's more the quality of Jeff's bass I'm interested in than the sheer extension.  Paul K might also want to take a crack at a folded transmission line. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Big Red Machine on 4 Jan 2011, 12:11 am
Well the HT3 is a great speaker but it is already close to the cost of a basic SS10.  It would seem the real trick is to try and see what can be done in the single cabinet design w/o edging up into SS10 market.

I've always like the angled fronts of the Avalons but would think a nice bookshelf with that sort of shape would be a very hot seller.  But then the added labor and fixturing to do a small speaker may not make sense.

So who's gonna step up and get some RAAL HT3's?
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 12:46 am
Well the HT3 is a great speaker but it is already close to the cost of a basic SS10.  It would seem the real trick is to try and see what can be done in the single cabinet design w/o edging up into SS10 market.

I've always like the angled fronts of the Avalons but would think a nice bookshelf with that sort of shape would be a very hot seller.  But then the added labor and fixturing to do a small speaker may not make sense.

The basic HT3 is $4,000 cheaper than the basic SS10.  That's not close for someone on a government pension. 
Jim sent me a cabinet a few years ago that was constructed almost identically to the Avalon shown.  It was full of diffraction effects and just didn't work out.  It may work better with the Avalon drivers, but I don't think Jim would be anxious to revisit that approach.  If you want the mdf prototype--it's ready for pick up in Bethesda.  I'll leave it out front. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: ratso on 4 Jan 2011, 12:48 am
Well the HT3 is a great speaker but it is already close to the cost of a basic SS10.

unless prices have changed, isn't the SS10 almost twice the cost of a HT3 (5995 vs. 9999)?

**edit damn that dennis guy is quick. beat me to it!
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: K Shep on 4 Jan 2011, 01:56 am
Be careful Robin I sense  :kiss: :kiss: coming on.  :nono:

Bill, don't injure your arm stirring up sh*t.   :roll:
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: catastrofe on 4 Jan 2011, 02:12 am
unless prices have changed, isn't the SS10 almost twice the cost of a HT3 (5995 vs. 9999)?

**edit damn that dennis guy is quick. beat me to it!

And who ever orders the "basic" version?!!   :green:
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Big Red Machine on 4 Jan 2011, 02:13 am
If you buy some HT3's there is a pretty good chance you'll spend more than $6k.  So when it hits $7k you're close enough to SS territory for me.  Why do you guys argue with my Spock-like superior logic? 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: vintagebob on 4 Jan 2011, 02:18 am
Live long and prosper...
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 02:21 am
If you buy some HT3's there is a pretty good chance you'll spend more than $6k.  So when it hits $7k you're close enough to SS territory for me.  Why do you guys argue with my Spock-like superior logic?

Spock Shmock.  And who orders a base SS10?  And why is that Avalon prototype still in front of my house? 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 4 Jan 2011, 03:18 pm
Just a note...

A side-firing woofer is not in the cards for the current HT3 design.  You would have to cross to the woofer below about 150Hz in order to make this work.  Since the HT3 woofer/midrange cross is quite a bit higher than this, it has to be front-firing.  So a 12" wide front baffle is pretty much a requirement.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 4 Jan 2011, 03:20 pm
I thought the cabinet would be a problem, but I wasn't really thinking of plumbing the depths all the way to 18 Hz.  I was wondering whether you could use smaller slaves--10"--and still have enough cabinet volume to reach the high 20's.  It's more the quality of Jeff's bass I'm interested in than the sheer extension.  Paul K might also want to take a crack at a folded transmission line. 

The TL is probably not all that workable in that the air velocity at the terminus would be quite high.  That is the problem we encountered with the SoundScape cabinet.  But using 10" passives and a tuning in the high 20's would probably be workable in a cabinet about the size of the current HT3 cabinet.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 4 Jan 2011, 03:23 pm
Another note...

As to the price differential of the HT3 vs. the SoundScape 10's, keep in mind that the current SoundScape prices are "introductory."  The SoundScape prices will most likely increase about 15 - 20% in the very near future. The top sections turned out to require FAR more labor than we had originally estimated and we had set the introductory prices a little on the low side to begin with.  So the price differential will be greater in the not-too-distant future.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 4 Jan 2011, 03:30 pm
Just a note...

A side-firing woofer is not in the cards for the current HT3 design.  You would have to cross to the woofer below about 150Hz in order to make this work.  Since the HT3 woofer/midrange cross is quite a bit higher than this, it has to be front-firing.  So a 12" wide front baffle is pretty much a requirement.

- Jim

Ah, I see; that makes sense.  Thanks for the explanation sir.

So who's gonna step up and get some RAAL HT3's?

I will.  Who's going to buy them for me? :D
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 4 Jan 2011, 03:41 pm
The main reasons the terminus air velocity ended up way too high in the SoundScape 12 were because, one, I didn't verify what it would reach with the driver hitting its Xmax of 1" and, two, I had to make the taper ratio quite aggressive and use a pretty short folded line to fit into the bass module cabinet in order to make the line's 1/4-wave resonant frequency optimum for the woofer.  The first was simply an error on my part :oops: which has and will not ever happen again!  If that very same woofer were placed in a cabinet about 45" tall, the folded line would end up at ~90" long, not need nearly as much taper and would work just fine, terminus air velocity included (I know because I modeled it that way later).  While no one will ever know unless it's tried (modeled) it's not necessarily true a TL would not be viable for the HT3 woofer and I sure would like a shot at it.
Paul

The TL is probably not all that workable in that the air velocity at the terminus would be quite high.  That is the problem we encountered with the SoundScape cabinet.  But using 10" passives and a tuning in the high 20's would probably be workable in a cabinet about the size of the current HT3 cabinet.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 03:54 pm
45" would probably be a no-go.  The SS10 stands 43" (outside measurement) without a plinth or spikes, and with spikes and plinth, the tweeter is already above a normal listening position. The taller MTM designs you've done have the the tweeter placed much lower between the woofers, so that hasn't been an issue.   
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 4 Jan 2011, 04:05 pm
The 45" height was just used as an example of how a tapered, single-fold line would allow the terminus air velocity to become a moot issue, not suggesting that it would necessarily fit into the existing HT3 cabinet.  A folded line can easily have more than one fold, thus allowing a pretty long line to fit into a not so tall cabinet, assuming there's enough cabinet volume to begin with.  You took my comments a bit too literally.
Paul

45" would probably be a no-go.  The SS10 stands 43" (outside measurement) without a plinth or spikes, and with spikes and plinth, the tweeter is already above a normal listening position. The taller MTM designs you've done have the the tweeter placed much lower between the woofers, so that hasn't been an issue.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: winston1156 on 4 Jan 2011, 04:48 pm
Is it possible to put the tweeter proportionately lower in a taller cabinet?  That keeps the listening height acceptable and the tl line is still doable?
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 04:53 pm
Is it possible to put the tweeter proportionately lower in a taller cabinet?  That keeps the listening height acceptable and the tl line is still doable?

I think Paul is saying that he could work around the height issue.  You can get into serious diffraction issues if you push the tweeter too far down into the wider section of the cabinet  And I'm not sure it would look all that great. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 4 Jan 2011, 05:39 pm
Yes, it's certainly possible to do that and an MTW (or WTM if you prefer) arrangement can work out just fine.  My latest DIY build was exactly that; there's a sealed chamber at the top for the midrange, and below that is larger chamber housing the tweeter and a folded, tapered line for the woofer.  The midrange's center is ~38" above the floor and was the design center for the crossover.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40875)

Paul

Is it possible to put the tweeter proportionately lower in a taller cabinet?  That keeps the listening height acceptable and the tl line is still doable?

I think Paul is saying that he could work around the height issue.  You can get into serious diffraction issues if you push the tweeter too far down into the wider section of the cabinet  And I'm not sure it would look all that great.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: fsimms on 4 Jan 2011, 05:49 pm

(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40875)

Nice job! 

I sure do love these discussions as it shows the depth of the thinking that goes into a Salk/Murphy/Bagby/Kittinger design.  :thumb:

Bob




Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 4 Jan 2011, 05:57 pm
Thanks, Bob.  The cabinet is finished with a combination of maple and walnut, both veneer and solid hardwood.  The woofer was located near the floor to benefit from that boundary's reinforcement, thus precluding any need for baffle step correction (thanks to that contribution from Jeff Bagby) and its negative effect on system sensitivity.
Paul

[quote author=fsimms
Nice job! 

I sure do love these discussions as it shows the depth of the thinking that goes into a Salk/Murphy/Bagby/Kittinger design.  :thumb:

Bob
[/quote]
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 06:41 pm
Very nice indeed.  Ribbon tweeters can present more of a placement issue, since their vertical dispersion isn't as great as a typcial dome.  That's why I prefer to keep the design axis on the tweeter.  Another issue in placing the woofer and mid so far apart is that you have to design for a specific listening distance.  I know that isn't an issue for Paul, because this speaker was designed specifically for a fixed listening position in his room.  I've done a couple of designs with the woofer near the floor, and could optimize response for, say, 3.5 meters with no problem.  But if you move up a little closer, the whole response around the woofer-mid crossover point will change to the point where you will eventually have a huge hole.  It's still a very valid approach, however.  I didn't do it to increase sensitivity per se, but rather to get rid of the floor bounce dip which is always there when you place the woofer up near the midrange.  I would be more reluctant to use a low-mounted woofer in a commercial design because it will have to be used in such a variety of listening positions. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Vulcan00 on 4 Jan 2011, 07:48 pm
Any idea of what that might look like?

- Jim

 If I may offer a few general points for a new HT3:

1. Definitely time for a HT3 upgrade:

2. Each driver to have its own enclosure. If a transmission design used then at least the tweeter is separate.

3. Use the smallest enclosure width possible for each driver.

4. The raal enclosure on top. Raal to have a minimum size enclosure/baffle. The Raal enclosure to be configured so that it can move 15 degrees in the vertical direction.

5. I would like to see the HT3 be taller at least as tall as the HT2-Tl. possibly taller with the 0-15 degree vertical movement.

6 I think the enclosure geometry should be simple , in order to keep the build costs as low as possible and allow the wood finishing designs to add the statement of quality and modern refinement.

I am working on a drawing unless , allready I'm off to a impractial start.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: winston1156 on 4 Jan 2011, 08:21 pm

(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40884)
Nice lines
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: fsimms on 4 Jan 2011, 08:40 pm
New HT3?


(http://www.salksound.com/gallery/johnzarafonetis/OB3-mahogany.jpg)

Maybe narrower bottom and top with current 10" woofer?

Bob
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: winston1156 on 4 Jan 2011, 08:58 pm
That is gorgeous!   

Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 4 Jan 2011, 10:11 pm
Dennis is correct; the Sonatello design was optimized for my ears while sitting in my sweet-spot recliner 9 feet away.  OTOH the Sonatellos certainly sounded quite good playing music while sitting on the stage at the last Iowa DIY event when I was sitting much further away in the auditorium seats and somewhat below the design axis. 
Paul

Very nice indeed.  Ribbon tweeters can present more of a placement issue, since their vertical dispersion isn't as great as a typcial dome.  That's why I prefer to keep the design axis on the tweeter.  Another issue in placing the woofer and mid so far apart is that you have to design for a specific listening distance.  I know that isn't an issue for Paul, because this speaker was designed specifically for a fixed listening position in his room.  I've done a couple of designs with the woofer near the floor, and could optimize response for, say, 3.5 meters with no problem.  But if you move up a little closer, the whole response around the woofer-mid crossover point will change to the point where you will eventually have a huge hole.  It's still a very valid approach, however.  I didn't do it to increase sensitivity per se, but rather to get rid of the floor bounce dip which is always there when you place the woofer up near the midrange.  I would be more reluctant to use a low-mounted woofer in a commercial design because it will have to be used in such a variety of listening positions.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 11:50 pm
Dennis is correct; the Sonatello design was optimized for my ears while sitting in my sweet-spot recliner 9 feet away.  OTOH the Sonatellos certainly sounded quite good playing music while sitting on the stage at the last Iowa DIY event when I was sitting much further away in the auditorium seats and somewhat below the design axis. 
Paul

The problem occurs when you have to sit closer than the design point.  Once you're at the sweet spot, moving back doesn't change the relative angles of the mid and woofer center points all that much.  But as you get closer, the angle changes substantially, which translates into greater relative differences in the travel times of the woofer and mid outputs.  That translates into changes in the relative phase at the closer listening postion, which creates a null where the two drivers overlap in frequency. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 4 Jan 2011, 11:53 pm
Oh--one other thing.  I know I promised to update my avatar with a more recent pic of the now bigger Ben, but he ate (well, destroyed) my digital camera.  Along with his puppy training manual and most of my collection of sheet music.   
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Paul K. on 5 Jan 2011, 12:13 am
Since sitting further away is apparently okay, it would seem that you could optimize the design for a closer listening distance, say 6 feet, and that would cover most everybody's situation I would think?
Paul

The problem occurs when you have to sit closer than the design point.  Once you're at the sweet spot, moving back doesn't change the relative angles of the mid and woofer center points all that much.  But as you get closer, the angle changes substantially, which translates into greater relative differences in the travel times of the woofer and mid outputs.  That translates into changes in the relative phase at the closer listening postion, which creates a null where the two drivers overlap in frequency.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: drab on 5 Jan 2011, 12:27 am
Oh--one other thing.  I know I promised to update my avatar with a more recent pic of the now bigger Ben, but he ate (well, destroyed) my digital camera.  Along with his puppy training manual and most of my collection of sheet music.

Smart dog! This way he can get out of school, sleep in peace and quiet, and you have no way of documenting any of it!!  :lol: They are so cute at that age.  :thumb:
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 5 Jan 2011, 12:57 am
Since sitting further away is apparently okay, it would seem that you could optimize the design for a closer listening distance, say 6 feet, and that would cover most everybody's situation I would think?
Paul

It's not all that easy to achieve good results at a close listening position with wide-spaced drivers.  The result would probably be a compromise that wasn't optimal for anyone. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 5 Jan 2011, 12:59 am
Smart dog! This way he can get out of school, sleep in peace and quiet, and you have no way of documenting any of it!!  :lol: They are so cute at that age.  :thumb:

Yeah--real cute.  Some people think Dennis the Menace is cute.  It kind of depends on whether you own the property they destroy.   :?
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Kris on 5 Jan 2011, 09:30 am
Separate enclosures make sense, easier to aim and move around, who said the Soundscape has to be the Salk TOTL.  :wink:
I never saw an Internet direct company offer 3 box designs like these:
(http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f366/salamalekos/focal_1.jpg)
(http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f366/salamalekos/cyclop_focal-cab.gif)
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 5 Jan 2011, 04:34 pm
Oh--one other thing.  I know I promised to update my avatar with a more recent pic of the now bigger Ben, but he ate (well, destroyed) my digital camera.  Along with his puppy training manual and most of my collection of sheet music.   
:duh:  Sorry to hear that, Dennis. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Nuance on 5 Jan 2011, 04:35 pm
Separate enclosures make sense, easier to aim and move around, who said the Soundscape has to be the Salk TOTL.  :wink:
I never saw an Internet direct company offer 3 box designs like these:
(http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f366/salamalekos/focal_1.jpg)
(http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f366/salamalekos/cyclop_focal-cab.gif)

I like the look of those, for what it's worth.  Very sleek!
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: OgOgilby on 6 Jan 2011, 02:06 am
Oh--one other thing.  I know I promised to update my avatar with a more recent pic of the now bigger Ben, but he ate (well, destroyed) my digital camera.  Along with his puppy training manual and most of my collection of sheet music.

At least Ben has kept away from your speakers...  :thumb:

Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 6 Jan 2011, 02:20 am
Awwwwww.  Very cute puppy.  Just start nailing everything down. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: OgOgilby on 6 Jan 2011, 02:46 am
Thanks Dennis. I was more than a bit worried about out HT2's and speaker cables before reading your post. Now we need to keep an eye on our camera!

Looking forward to seeing some recent pics of Ben - when you get another camera.

Back on topic... I do like the idea of an adjustable three section HT3 (like the Focal's).

Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: DMurphy on 6 Jan 2011, 02:51 pm
Actually, I don't see the point of a segmented, adjustable speaker.  What's the reference configuration for design purposes?  If it's accurate in the postitioning used to design it, it won't be accurate when you start repositioning things.  I can see the need to raise the entire speaker under some circumstances, but you would do that with a different size plinth or spikes. 
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: jsalk on 6 Jan 2011, 04:48 pm
There are few limits to how exotic a cabinet design can get.  But keep in mind that the cabinet is usually the most expensive part of the speaker.  So re-working the HT3 in some of the ways suggested will only serve to make it a much more expensive speaker.  It will likely not increase the sound quality to any appreciable degree.

The SoundScape 10's were designed to take the HT3 concept to the next level.  And they certainly do that in almost every aspect.  So, in a very real sense, we have already re-designed the HT3 (and named it the SoundScape).

My current inclinations are to leave the HT3 as it is.  It is a very good speaker in its current form.  If I think about re-working it, I immediately think about the driver selection, etc.  In other words, everything would be on the table, not just the cabinet.  In that case, it wouldn't end up being an HT3.  It would probably be a totally new design and would probably be priced at about where the SoundScape is now. 

That said, if someone wants an HT3 in a cabinet that looks different, we would certainly work to accomplish whatever that customer wants, including cabinet designs much like those posted above.  That is a big part of what we do and I have no problem with that.  It would just be more expensive.

- Jim
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: carusoracer on 6 Jan 2011, 05:32 pm
Interesting thread. I like to hear the proactive nature of all the posts, especially from the designer and crossover guru's :thumb:

With that said, I must really need to hear this new RAAL Tweeter. My HT'3 keep getting better just a like a vintage wine. I still do not believe I have found the limits of what they are capable of. My transition to all tubes has contributed to more of a luv affair with the sounds they can produce.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: coke on 6 Jan 2011, 05:40 pm
Interesting thread. I like to hear the proactive nature of all the posts, especially from the designer and crossover guru's :thumb:

With that said, I must really need to hear this new RAAL Tweeter. My HT'3 keep getting better just a like a vintage wine. I still do not believe I have found the limits of what they are capable of. My transition to all tubes has contributed to more of a luv affair with the sounds they can produce.

I feel the same with my HT2-TLs.   As I fix room and equipment issues, they just keep getting better.  My major issue now is the room, and I don't feel a need to upgrade before that's fixed.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: TomS on 6 Jan 2011, 05:54 pm
Interesting thread. I like to hear the proactive nature of all the posts, especially from the designer and crossover guru's :thumb:

With that said, I must really need to hear this new RAAL Tweeter. My HT'3 keep getting better just a like a vintage wine. I still do not believe I have found the limits of what they are capable of. My transition to all tubes has contributed to more of a luv affair with the sounds they can produce.

I agree this has been an interesting thread in its openness.  Jim kind of said it and you nailed it with the wine association.  The HT3 is really a classic design now and should probably be left well enough alone.  Changing the tweeter over for new orders probably makes sense just from a sourcing and support standpoint.  When you start making all kinds of other variations, changing cabinet shapes, etc. then it might actually de-value the brand as nobody really knows what the speaker is anymore.  Resale suffers too.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: martyo on 6 Jan 2011, 06:00 pm
Quote
With that said, I must really need to hear this new RAAL Tweeter. My HT'3 keep getting better just a like a vintage wine.

The same with me and our HT3's. When I'm listening to ours I'm very content. (Well, there can always be more low end  :lol:) Even the highs are awesome. Then I go over and listen to my bro's HT2-TL's and am amazed with that RAAL. It really is special. And I LOVE the HT2's. But I still will take the HT3 w/G2 over the HT2-TL w/RAAL.  8)
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Vulcan00 on 6 Jan 2011, 08:57 pm
Very interesting indeed.


Actually, I don't see the point of a segmented, adjustable speaker.  What's the reference configuration for design purposes?  If it's accurate in the postitioning used to design it, it won't be accurate when you start repositioning things.  I can see the need to raise the entire speaker under some circumstances, but you would do that with a different size plinth or spikes. 

My thoughts about a 0- 15 deg, Raal was to have a method to respond to the vertical displacement issues with ribbon tweeters. If this would indeed upset the accuracy, then scrap that idea !

 martyo:

Very interesting opinon on the HT3 vs. the HT2-TL. I have been wondering about that !
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: winston1156 on 6 Jan 2011, 09:14 pm
I read from someone, I think magico, that said their why would you move a piece of the speaker if it has been perfectly aligned.   I agree 99%.  I suppose a very small adjustment might work.   Personally, I think that is not the best way to go however.  Better to fidget with placement or dsp or some such thing.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Rocket on 6 Jan 2011, 10:15 pm
Hi,

I actually like the cabinet design of the HT3's.  Some of the pictures that were shown looked too art deco for my tastes and I much prefer the coffin shapped cabinet.  Just my opinion though.

I think a TL version of the speaker would be an interesting proposition.

Regards

Rod
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: Big Red Machine on 6 Jan 2011, 10:31 pm


 martyo:

Very interesting opinon on the HT3 vs. the HT2-TL. I have been wondering about that !
  Try not to encourage him. 8)
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: audio0947 on 9 Jan 2011, 09:47 pm
There are few limits to how exotic a cabinet design can get.  But keep in mind that the cabinet is usually the most expensive part of the speaker.  So re-working the HT3 in some of the ways suggested will only serve to make it a much more expensive speaker.  It will likely not increase the sound quality to any appreciable degree.

The SoundScape 10's were designed to take the HT3 concept to the next level.  And they certainly do that in almost every aspect.  So, in a very real sense, we have already re-designed the HT3 (and named it the SoundScape).

My current inclinations are to leave the HT3 as it is.  It is a very good speaker in its current form.  If I think about re-working it, I immediately think about the driver selection, etc.  In other words, everything would be on the table, not just the cabinet.  In that case, it wouldn't end up being an HT3.  It would probably be a totally new design and would probably be priced at about where the SoundScape is now. 

That said, if someone wants an HT3 in a cabinet that looks different, we would certainly work to accomplish whatever that customer wants, including cabinet designs much like those posted above.  That is a big part of what we do and I have no problem with that.  It would just be more expensive.

- Jim
Then dont bother, your prices have gone up enough and raising the price on the HT3 again will only serve to push more people like me for whom it was on the edge of what budget would allow towards other designs.
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: taoggniklat on 14 Jan 2011, 07:11 pm
All I know is that I would love any of the Salk line in my system....someday someday!
Title: Re: RAAL tweeter
Post by: satfrat on 14 Jan 2011, 08:58 pm
I think anyone who's actually heard the HT-3's perform at their best would be hard pressed to even consider messing with a good thing as it's design. I can state as a fact after hearing them for myself in such a system, if I were ever fortunate enough to have the means to purchase them, changing the cabinet wouldn't ever remotely enter my mind.  :nono:
 
Spikes,,,,,,, maybe.  :lol:
 
Cheers,
Robin