AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Manufacturer Circles => Solar Hi-fi => Topic started by: KevinW on 4 Aug 2003, 04:05 pm
-
Please ask me questions about the Solar 1.0 speaker...
(http://www.solarhifi.com/images/products/solarhifi/solar1/solar1B_t.jpg)
This speakers uses a Jordan JX92S full-range 4" driver in a transmission line enclosure. The JX92S is widely regarded as one of the best midrange drivers ever produced, and it has phenomenal capability to create the full-range of the audio spectrum. It plays down to 60Hz in my highly tweaked transmission line cabinet, and can handle up to 20kHz. And even though the very top end is a little ragged, it is not very noticeable.
The goal of the speaker is to have no-crossover in the primary musical frequency band of 80 Hz to 8 kHz. There's no way around the deleterious effect that crossovers have on the music. The one other speaker manufacturer that I know goes to great lengths to avoid the XO in this region is VMPS, and look at the benefits they reap. The ear is just too finely sensitive to XO's in the musical band, and even though it's effects are subtle, it is always present. To understand just how present, you need to actually hear a speaker without the effects of an XO. It just sounds more clean, natural, airy and NATURAL. Like real music and performers.
The Solar 1.0 has a particular advantage. It has NO crossover at all. Without the XO, the microdynamics and fine detail of the music rises to a higher level, and is breathtaking to say the least. Nuances of music, such as fine metal brushwork, and harmonic overtones of strings, bass, and brass are astoundingly apparent. Pianos sound like you can hear the wooden box resonating along with the strings. It really is a unique experience. It also helps that the Jordan driver is truly excellent at the reproduction of midrange, easily one of the best in the world.
The transmission line design is also special, in that it has the tightest and most natural sounding bass. To make this design, I tapped into the huge store of arcane knowledge of Jennifer Whitewolf-Crock of Jena Labs. She has built transmission line designs for 20 years, and knows all the little tricks. I am lucky to have her help, and it certainly shows in the results.
Of course, this speaker has a few drawbacks. It's only a single 4" driver, so thundering bass isn't going to happen. But the transmission line design rolls off in the bass more smooth than any other cabinet design, and this makes it very easy to match with a subwoofer. In fact, the $399 Adire Rava is a beautiful, seamless match. This allows the Solar 1.0 to excel at bass-heavy music, such as rock, electronica, reggae, etc...
And also, the high frequencies above about 12kHz are a little ragged, because a 4" driver is just too large to do them really clean. That's while I'll be selling an add-on ribbon tweeter upgrade. The main cabinet will have a clever hidden attachment mechanism, so that you can mount the tweeter module securely. Just connect the jumpers, and away you go with much improved sound in the highs. However, there may be times when no XO will be advantageous, so the tweeter can easily be disconnected to get a "different" sound out of one speaker.
I have made special effort to make this speaker affordable. $949 is an excellent value for the resulting sound quality. Unfortunately, the cost of bamboo is very high ($200 for a single 4x8' sheet), and a fniished speaker using this material is $1149. But the bamboo looks gorgeous, and has better resonance control and thus sounds better. I think this is still a great value.
-
So any chance these speakers, or preferably maybe some future monitors, will make their way through the AC audition chain? :D
-
One note of advice. If you do wind up testing any single driver crossoverless speakers (like the really nice looking T-lines offered by Solar), please make sure you use a good SET amp or at least a tube powered amp. I love the sound of single ended amps and crossoverless speakers of this nature. IMO, they are not a good match for a solid state amp. The "magic", particularly in the midrange region, is not there on SS. On set, even low powered like the Decware Zen, they are a totally different animal.
Just a suggestion.
J
-
Jackman is correct. There is definitely magic in the combination of SET and these speakers. I currently use an ASL Tulip, which is a 2A3 SET amp with 3.5 watts of power. The sound is positively delicious. Also, since the bass rolls off at 60Hz, the amps can drive the speakers to quite loud levels without a problem.
I've also paired the speakers with Soundguy3's Acoustic Reality Ear digital amp, and they sounded fantastic. I have high hopes for the digital amp I am developing with Jena Labs.
I would not go so far as to state that they are a bad match for solid state amps, as the sound is quite refined. There is still magic in the midrange, however they are revealing of system faults. That's the one frequent drawback of ultra-revealing speakers. :wink:
-
So any chance these speakers, or preferably maybe some future monitors, will make their way through the AC audition chain? :D
I could do that, if there is interest, and if people do not mind paying the higher shipping costs. These are not monitors, but rather very small footprint floor standers. They weigh about 40lbs each.
-
I would suggest getting a large group of people together and having the group split the shipping cost. If you get four or five guys, it will make it much easier. Plus, you may need help Also, Kevin, do you agree with the suggestion on the SET amp? I love the sound of these types of speakers (never herd yours) with SET but don't think SS is a good match.
What are your thoughts?
J
-
Hey, well the first group is going to happen pretty soon at Solar Hifi World Headquarters (my listening room). I live in Portland, Oregon. So if you're local and have interest, send me a PM. This will probably happen in mid-september. Pre-VSAC. And I should have the digital amp and hopefully the MTM floorstander ready. I WILL be at VSAC, sharing my room with Jena Labs, so that will be another opportunity to hear them.
I'll make sure there is a demo pair ready for shipping to a group of people willing to split costs.
Regarding SET's. YES YES YES YES, they sound fantastic with these speakers. The harmonics and micro-dynamics are reproduced like no other speaker I have ever heard for anywhere close to the price. These speakers are designed to be a mid-level starting point for an SET love affair. For less money, with slightly lower performance, I also sell the Adire HE10.1 series.
In my opinion, one of the main benefits of SET's is the emphasis on 2nd order harmonics, which the ear loves to hear. It's like putting seasoning on food... it makes a good thing taste even better. So even though one could argue that SET's add something to the music which wasn't in the recording, it is adding something that is a natural component of music, so everything sounds perfectly natural and normal... and usually better. Just like adding a little melted butter on grilled wild salmon.
The Solar 1.0 has no XO, which always robs some energy out of the musical signal. The micro-micro-dynamic details of music is what is lost first. With the Solar 1.0, this doesn't occur. So practically speaking, there is a more intimate connection with the music, and a greater sense of space to the whole soundscape. You can hear details of the recording venue, etc...
In fact, I should just say outright, that one of the impetus for designing these speakers was to pair them with SET's. I have loved the sound of SET's for a long time, and these speakers are designed to maximize the unique qualities of SET's. One thing that really suprised however, was that the manufacturer's spec efficiency is only average, but in real life, my 3.5 watt Tulip has no problems driving them to loud levels without distortion. I think this is because of the very smooth rolloff of the bass, thanks to the transmission line design.
-
Who builds the cabinets? Got a picture of what the inside looks like?
-
Who builds the cabinets? Got a picture of what the inside looks like?
I can't show a picture of the insides, because that would divulge the secret transmission line design. There's a system that Jena Labs has developed which involves varying the cross-sectional area of the line in a particular way to increase bass response while dampening unwanted resonance. Buy I can say that the line is folded four times, and has natural wool and wool felt stuffing and dampening. Wool has by far the best resonance control properties of any stuffing. The comparisons I did were quite apparent. The best part about wool is that it's also a sustainable resource... no fossil fuels were harmed to produce it. :lol:
The cabinets are built by Ron Deschayne. Ron is a young, talented carpenter who primarily builds custom cabinetry for very expensive homes. He is extremely meticulous and does a fantastic job. We should have a bamboo finished speaker ready very soon. I think people will be very impressed with the craftsmanship quality.
-
Yeah i have a question - is this the best gawd damn full range driver you can possibly get? cause i know know much about full ranges but i wouldnt want to experience anything but the best of the concept...
whatever it costs.
so if you next model can be the best then ill want to know about it - or if you think this ones the best already (but that would probably be premature to say).
-N
-
Yeah i have a question - is this the best gawd damn full range driver you can possibly get? cause i know know much about full ranges but i wouldnt want to experience anything but the best of the concept...
-N
Hey that's a great question. Is this the best full-range speaker money can buy? Maybe it is! But it really depends on what you call "best". The simple fact of the matter, is that no single driver on earth can produce 20 Hz to 20 kHz perfectly. A compromise must be made to approach the full spectrum of sound reproduction. I think the compromise my speaker makes is better than others out there (e.g. Lowther).
When it comes to defining best, I choose excellent sound quality over bass extension. A larger driver (e.g. 6" or more) would have better bass, but then it would suffer from resonance and breakup modes in the crucial region where most music resides: 80Hz to 8kHz. Check out the frequency response of the Jordan (from www.ejjordan.co.uk)
(http://www.ejjordan.co.uk/JX92s-frequency-lg.gif)
See how it doesn't start to break up before 8kHz? When the frequency response starts to look jagged, that's a breakup mode. This means that the cone is "ringing" at the freqeuncy, and thus not reproducing smooth music. The ear is actually quite sensitive to this in the region of 80Hz to 8kHz. Outside of this range, the ear is a lot less able to hear subtle nuances and thus the breakup above 8kHz is not as glaringly obvious. It is still sometimes audible, but it's easy to overlook when the rest of the music sounds so good. That's also why I'm developing the add-on tweeter to allow a mix and match of listening preference.
If a larger driver was used, then the breakup would occur sooner, and thus in my opinion would not be as good. I really think that a 4" full-range drivers are the way to go, and the Jordan is the best of those. Although of course, then the compromise to get deep bass of kick drums, electronic music, etc requires a subwoofer. But my transmission line allows for very smooth rolloff of the bass, and thus easy, seamless integration with a musical subwoofer.
So did I answer your question? :)
-
Yes you have actually - i did some research of my own and it would seem the driver your using was the open class winner in atlanta in 2001. So i take it its not bad :)
you could have a pretty small sort of tweeter with this sort of speaker - cause the tweeter would really only be doing a small amount of the top end output...
perhaps a super tweeters in order make sure you get all those harmonics that we cant even hear in there for the 'ultra real' sound.
but then you have ruined it :P its not full range anymore...
hrmmm I am really interested in full ranges - but i cant imagine i would like their sound, as i am used to hearing the whole spectrum of sound from 20hz to 35khz. (yeah i know i cant hear that high but its being played with my super tweeters).
I would like more 'pure' sound though - so maybe something like this ... in a small bedroom would be good where you can use the room to make up for some of the bass lacking - and then some super tweeters in SERIES baby. :P
anyways just thinkin....
-N
-
Maybe someone should make a dual concentric driver with an 8KHz or higher XO point instead of around 1-2KHz like most are that I know of. That way you could extend the frequency response past the breakup point but still keep the sound firing from the same point in space. Kinda like that speaker JohnR made with the "full range" Fostex supplemented with a tweeter except that the tweeter would be on axis with the "full range".
-
Yes you have actually - i did some research of my own and it would seem the driver your using was the open class winner in atlanta in 2001. So i take it its not bad :)
Yeah, it's a really fantastic driver. Best midrange I have heard, but it does pretty okay for bass and treble too. And it's so free of resonance. A very nice piece of engineering.
you could have a pretty small sort of tweeter with this sort of speaker - cause the tweeter would really only be doing a small amount of the top end output...
Yeah, exactly what I'm thinking. Most ribbon tweets play down to 2-3kHz, so 8 kHz is no problem, and well within the linear range of frequency response. I can use the cheaper ribbons, and eschew the mega-bucks ribbons designed to play into the 500Hz range. Saves money, and doesn't hurt sound quality at all.
perhaps a super tweeters in order make sure you get all those harmonics that we cant even hear in there for the 'ultra real' sound.
but then you have ruined it :P its not full range.
The tweeter I'm using plays up to 40kHz, so even your pets will be impressed :D
hrmmm I am really interested in full ranges - but i cant imagine i would like their sound, as i am used to hearing the whole spectrum of sound from 20hz to 35khz. (yeah i know i cant hear that high but its being played with my super tweeters).
Like I said before, there's no such thing as a single driver, full range speaker that plays from 20Hz to 20kHz. So you have to make a compromise somewhere. I have done my best to make the compromise as sonically transparent as possible, incorporating many special design features into one package. The TL design integrates very well with a sealed, musical subwoofer to play down deep. The add-on tweeter, which is essentially a super tweeter, smooths out the highs.
I suppose now's a good time to mention the 30 day audition period. :) :wink:
-
Maybe someone should make a dual concentric driver with an 8KHz or higher XO point instead of around 1-2KHz like most are that I know of. That way you could extend the frequency response past the breakup point but still keep the sound firing from the same point in space. Kinda like that speaker JohnR made with the "full range" Fostex supplemented with a tweeter except that the tweeter would be on axis with the "full range".
Cool idea! You're always thinking creatively... However my gut feeling is that this wouldn't be too practical. Because you wouldn't be able to use anything larger than a 4" woofer, or else you would have cone breakup before 8kHz. In fact, I think that Jordan's linear behavior up to 8k is actually quite a nice bit of clever engineering. A 4" driver doesn't leave a lot of room for a concentric tweeter, and you would still need a big woofer for the deep bass.
-
Kevin, how about a line array with like four Jordan's/channel? :D That way you still have the benefits of not having a crossover and better bass and impact due to increased driver area? :D May be add a ribbon tweeter for treble?
-
yeah thats what i was thinking sica...
but you still dont get 'lower bass' you only really get louder at the mid bass .... simulating 'more' frequency range
but sounding boomy to anyone thats heard true range.
-
Sica,
Werticus has the right idea. The Jordan Driver has a Fs (resonany frequency) of about 60Hz. This means that it can't really play any lower than that. So adding more drivers doesn't get the bass any lower. Above 80 Hz, a single 4" driver is adequate for very loud passages. It moves plenty of air. The absolute best way to deal with the lower amount of bass is by adding a musical sub with a variable XO's at about 60 Hz. This adds a little extra bass to blend with the Jordan below 80Hz, and takes over completely below 80Hz. The transmission line allows a very smooth rolloff into the bass, which makes the blending seamless. And the variable XO on the sub is tuned by ear to make a good match with how the Jordan TL tower excites the bass in the room. I think this can result in a near-optimal solution to the conundrum of 20Hz to 20kHz sound from a single full range driver. What do you think?
With the Rava sub at $399, I don't see any reason to buy anything else. It's an awesome musical subwoofer, regardless of the price. Well, unless you want to shake the walls below 30Hz, in which case the new Daeva with a 15" Tempest driver is the solution. I've got one of those in shipment... $599
There's one other problem with the idea that Sica proposed. It has to do with comb filtering at higher frequencies. A line array only works if all frequencies are emitted in a true line, otherwise you get lobing and weird concelation effects from multiple distinct sources. (e.g. comb filtering)
The problem with using cones for a line array is that high frequencies have too small of a wavelength to make a "virtual" line from several cones. a 20 kHz wave has length of .68 inches, so a line array should have emitters spaced no more than .68 inches apart. You can't get this by stacking 4" drivers. It's physically impossible. So the treble from four stacked drivers would be a mess of comb filtering. The only way to do a good line array for treble is using a long ribbon.
-
Not trying to rain on Kevin's parade, but I am not so sure I'd call this speaker a "good value". For nearly a thousand bucks the thing is fizzling out at 60Hz requiring even more money to go towards sub\bass bin augmentation, unless of course you only listen to flute solos. I can think of a number of vendors offering similar designs with better bass extension and for less money. I can't comment on how its 80-8K range sounds, but man, that's a lot of dough for such a limited bandwidth. The Solar seems to need lots of outside help. I would think it would be a better value if an additional woofer was incorporated so it could properly play the bottom octaves by itself. You're going to need a crossover of SOME kind no matter what with this setup. Hmmm.
-
Fair enough criticism Nathan, and I'm glad you brought it up. You have to hear the speakers to decide on value. They sound really really good, and I'm definitely willing to stack them up against other speakers that make a different set of compromises (e.g. XO to get better bass). As far as listening to music goes however, I think mine are a lot more "musical", have far better microdynamics and detail, image better, and have zero phase distortion. These are the qualities of music reproduction that make us all stay up late at night listening, and I have tried to maximize these qualities above all else. This results in a slightly different set of compromises, which I have tried to explain.
Of course, not being a marketing whizz kid, I have a hard time understanding how people interpret my explanations with regard to actually buying something. Any ideas there? :)
-
I would think it would be a better value if an additional woofer was incorporated so it could properly play the bottom octaves by itself. You're going to need a crossover of SOME kind no matter what with this setup.
I disagree on this point. Some people may not ever need a subwoofer with this speaker. For jazz, it's totally unnecessary, because it handles the acoustic bass just fine (even in a largish room). Adding a sub fleshes it out a little bit, but is not at all necessary for enjoyment.
Now where a sub comes in handy is for rock, electronica, reggae, and home theater use. However all those applications typically require slightly different levels. So with the subwoofer, you can adjust it to match the bass levels for each application. So this method is actually the most flexible available.
If I made the speaker bigger, and added a bass driver with XO, then more compromises are added to the musical sound quality. And for HT applications, most people would still want to add a subwoofer anyway. But then there's a problem with blending the subwoofer with the bass driver of the speaker. This can be a big problem, and is the reason why all the multichannel systems need to have bass management. My system eliminates the problem while saving money. :)
-
Kevin, I think you are doing a good job with marketing. You are sincere and knowledgeable when answering our questions, especially nathamn's :wink:
-
Thanks!! I really am trying to sell from knowledge and education, because my goal is to be able to open a "new" market for audiophile equipment through my environmental angle. But to sell what will be considered expensive gear, I'll have to be very good at education. :) Especially when consider how much time and energy we have to spend just to get decent sound quality 8)
Nathan keeps me honest. He's done that since I first started selling equipment on the side in Dec 2002. Keep it coming Nathan! I think you might be losing your touch. The quality of your skepticism isn't what it used to be. :lol:
FYI, I am REALLY looking forward to Aug 15th, which is my last day of working for someone else. I have some really interesting educational ideas to debut on my website.
-
Losing my touch eh? Ha! Actually I've been holding back from criticizing your overpriced, drab-looking debut offering out of kindness on this being your new Circle and all. Ahh, but thanks for the open invitation, Kevin! :P Muwhahaha!
Kevin, I think you are doing a good job with marketing. You are sincere and knowledgeable when answering our questions, especially nathamn's :wink:
Yes well, doing a good job with marketing is the whole problem with this industry in the first place!
For jazz, it's totally unnecessary, because it handles the acoustic bass just fine (even in a largish room). Adding a sub fleshes it out a little bit, but is not at all necessary for enjoyment.
Fair enough, if you like this sound it that's fine, but to suggest there is no musical information in jazz below 60Hz is a bit silly I think. By your claim this speaker craps out at 60Hz, so it is missing about 2.5 octaves of the musical spectrum! To say it needs a SUBwoofer isn't quite right, as it actually needs some woofing period! String bass, kick drums, guitar - all these sounds have plenty of energy beyond the Solar's drop off. Truncating the frequency balance whilst calling it "more musical" seems rather odd.
My system eliminates the problem while saving money.
It does not eliminate the problem it ignores it! The only way it saves you money is if you don't like hearing bass! So you're $950 in the hole for the main speaker. Now you'll need a subwoofer and amp (another $400 or so) to fill in that rolled off bottom. Gee, maybe now you'll need a supertweeter so you can hear the cymbals...you call this saving money? That's marketing for you; they offer something which needs a dozen extra accessories to actually do what you want and they tell you they're saving you money! Feh!
But to sell what will be considered expensive gear, I'll have to be very good at education.
I think the word you're looking for is "PR" not "education". :P Let's not sugar coat things here, this is a business for selling products, not educating people! Sheesh! Hey, I think the ecological stuff is great, but let's not kid ourselves about the goal here! And a thousand dollars IS expensive. Then again, there's plenty of bass-shy, overpriced minimonitors out there which can be even more expensive. Still doesn't change the fact that a grand is a big chunk to spend on speakers for most folks.
The Hornshoppe Horn, Omegas, Norh, and many more I am probably forgetting - all these offer single drivers with similar or superior frequency balance and for much less money. And also better looking, subjectively speaking. No offense but the Solar looks like a DIY project done over with black spray paint. It doesn't exactly say "I'm worth a thousand bucks!" to me. Hopefully the bamboo will have a more interesting patina. A Tiki-themed speaker would be cool!
Well, you asked for it Kevin! :D Heh heh! Criticism aside, I wish you luck with your company. Hell, I'd gladly audition this skinny little ponce of a speaker any time and compare it with my alarm clock, as both have similar bass response! :lol:
-
I think its obvious the solar 1.0 is a speaker aimed at a niche market....
There isnt going to be any testosterone filled 15 to 20yr olds buying them
This is a refined speaker designed with different compromises to most speakers out there.
Its compromising range for quality - its the full range 'idea'. Basically its doing the best it can to produce 'awesome' (i have never heard but im sure it is) quality in a limited spectrum...
Im not sure if its a good idea to do this.... i can however think of a pretty good use for these speakers...
They would reside nicely in my bed room, so i can put on some really transparent anolgue background music with a low powered single ended tube amp and a garade record player. whilst seducing the ladies. ;)
-
The Hornshoppe Horn, Omegas, Norh, and many more I am probably forgetting - all these offer single drivers with similar or superior frequency balance and for much less money.
Only if you're enough of a sucker to believe whatever numbers people dream up. You can't seriously believe that a 3-inch Tangband driver is superior to the Jordan, in *any* respect?
No four or five inch driver is going to produce thundering bass, but the sub option is viable for many people. Hell, *you* have a sub, don't you? After following your misadventures with various crap speakers, I find it hard to believe that you can take yourself seriously in what you've been posting above.
No offence, really, but this is ridiculous...
JohnR
-
Well first of all John I'm NOT taking this completely seriously as my post illustrated.
Who said anything about "thundering bass"? It never fails that when you discuss frequency response it is assumed the listener wants to play subsonic gansta rap at 150db. That's not the issue at all. I just think it's misleading to think that you only need a certain range of the spectrum to be "musically satisfying" for specific genres of music. Jazz bass is bass as is rock bass, folk bass, orchestral bass...all music has it and there's plenty of it below 60Hz (which is also not considered SUB bass). To me the main cabinets need more a bit extention to blend well with a subwoofer and the higher the XO point the more troublesome it can be.
The main point I am bringing up is that the speaker seems to be awfully pricey for what it does. Not saying any other brand of driver is superior or anything like that. I never said anything like that. Perhaps Kevin's measurements are far more truthful than those others. Entirely possible! Perhaps it does sounds really great. Also entirely possible. I would just desire a bit more flesh on the bottom for that kind of money, that's all.
So what non-CRAP speakers would you suggest I try, John?
-
Hey Nathan,
Thanks for your post above! Great fun, indeed. I really appreciate the help in finding the "holes" in my marketing schtick ;)
JohnR... I did ask Nathan to be overly critical on purpose. It's good practice for me, and controversy is good for discussion too 8)
The main point I am bringing up is that the speaker seems to be awfully pricey for what it does. Not saying any other brand of driver is superior or anything like that. I never said anything like that. Perhaps Kevin's measurements are far more truthful than those others. Entirely possible! Perhaps it does sounds really great. Also entirely possible. I would just desire a bit more flesh on the bottom for that kind of money, that's all.
Well Nathan, it is NOT pricey for what it does. It has the most beautiful midrange, vocals, and microdynamics I have heard in a speaker under $1k. Really there is no comparison to anything in its class. However, if a customer told me they like "thundering bass and screeching treble" I would say this isn't a speaker for you. I've got no problem steering people away from my product for something they will actually like based on their listening preferences. But I think that at least 2/3rds of the audiophile market will be mightily impressed from the sound of this speaker once they have actually heard it.
Regarding my measurements as being more truthful... well I am simply not interested in "inflating" the performance of my speaker, as this shortchanges the customer. If I said the Jordan TL plays down to 47 Hz, as the official driver manufacturer specs say, would you suddenly be impressed with the low end performance? Who knows, if you then bought it, maybe would convince yourself that the bass is really good. :) :)
But one thing I don't get, Nathan... and this is something JohnR already measured. If you really really care about bass, you want a subwoofer, which you already have. My speaker is DESIGNED to blend well with a sub. Why bother wasting money on a speaker that is designed to duplicate the function of a subwoofer, especially if that means compromising midrange quality. Blending a sub in at 60Hz is a really good place to do it! The wavelength of a 60Hz sound wave is about 19 feet, so it is very omnidirectional, but also not such a large wavelength that room resonances will dominate the transition.
Nathan, what frequency is your sub XO?
-
If I said the Jordan TL plays down to 47 Hz, as the official driver manufacturer specs say, would you suddenly be impressed with the low end performance? Who knows, if you then bought it, maybe would convince yourself that the bass is really good.
I wish! I've never been able to convince myself anything sounds better than it is on a consistent basis, unfortunately.
How did you arrive at the frequency response? Was it via math calculations or acoustic measurement? In a normal room or in an anechoic chamber? It would be cool if there some sort of pragmatic measurements like:
1. room size
2. generic description of walls and objects in room
3. speaker position
4. microphone position
Run a full spectrum pink noise measurement and see what you get. Publish 3 or 4 rooms of average real world sizes and then a user could look at that and say, "okay, well the 14x17' room is closest to mine, and it looks the bass dies off at 53Hz" or whatever. (just a made up example) Of course it's not completely ideal, but it would be a step in the right direction. I am not saying Solar HiFi has an obligation to do this, I'm just saying in a general sense speaker makers might do well to have the performance figures of a small assortment of "stock room sizes". Anechoic chambers are wonderful for pure science, but nobody I know plays tunes in one on a daily basis!
My sub is XOed at 45Hz, which is as low as my crossover goes. I was really amazed at how "unsteep" 24db per octave actually sounds in real life. Plenty of upper bass still comes through. granted, much of that is masked by the mains. If I go any higher than that the sub calls attention to itself. In my experience going higher would necessitate stereo subs. In my room with my equipment, 60Hz is too high. There's an incongruity between the two speakers. Hey, maybe your speaker does blend better. If so, great! I just feel subs should only give you the bottom most octave, ideally and not be used to pick up the slack from the mains. But as I said, if you had two subs in stereo higher XO point would probably be fine.
-
So what non-CRAP speakers would you suggest I try, John?
Based on what you've said in the past, I would look into speakers with large cone area, not just in the bass but in the mids as well, and high-ish sensitivity. Of course, you can never get more of one quality without giving up some of some other quality.
-
This design promotes the right priorities (mid-bass through mid treble frequency response, no cross-over, and a reasonable price). No speaker will address everyone's wants, but this does fit nicely into a market niche for coherent sound.
Much of the rest of the 20 - 20,000 Hz audio spectrum is filled with hype and inherent problems than most would like to admit. Please allow me to explain.
1. Precious little useful audible information or energy is available above 8,000 Hz. And the Jordan 92S does produce above that anyway. Break up and off axis roll off occurs with many designs. Adding a crossover would cause more harm than than a super tweeter could help IMO.
2. The transmission line bass loading provides for a slow frequency response roll off. Psychoacoustically this will make the speaker sound as if it has a more extended bass response than the numbers/graphs would suggest. This loading also helps to reduce the impedance rise at the drivers rated bass cut off. Honestly it seems that the speaker could have been rated to produce lower bass than what has been specified. As stated above, a 4 inch driver will not produce window rattling at 20 Hz. IMO transmission lines provide the best of all practical options for true, fast, musical bass response in the home.
3. In small rooms the amount of bass provided would be adequate for most musical forms. A powered subwoofer can to taylored to the room, taste, and source materials while being located in the room to maximum effect. I've had 8 inch stereo transmission lines and they overpowered any sized room I could afford (but sounded so good in a 20,000 cu. ft. chapel that I donated them to the church). Excess standing waves and excitation of room objects can turn the best bass production into one note booming.
The ideal source for accuracy in sound reproduction is a point source. Imaging cannot be improved by any other means. Multiple drivers will exhibit comb affects around the crossover frequencies (or at all reproduced frequencies if multiple full range drivers are used). Different size, type of drivers will respond differently (delays, off axis response, voicing, and speed) as they try to reproduce the same signal at the crossover frequencies. Use of multiple different drivers with crossovers can only add distortions in an attempt to extend a speaker's frequency response into ranges of questionable value.
The Jordan 92S is a remarkable driver. It's an aluminum foil that is designed to flex, versus providing pure pistonic action so often heralded. Ted Jordan has spent 40+ years improving the concept in which the center only responses to higher frequencies. The waterfall plot is extremely impressive. It is promoted as providing 9 octave range response (this is pushing things a bit IMO). The cone is very light weight. However it is not an inexpensive driver, about $120 each delivered to the U.S.
I'm very cheap, but appreciate the value in this speaker. First, you can spend more for monitors and still need stands. Second, you can spend more far less on drivers for $1,000 speakers. Third, you can spend twice as much for the very similar Konus speakers.
jeff