0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 827 times.
(setting aside for the moment the fundamental contradiction with the, "circle of confusion," concept that is foundational to the approach that made the JBL M2, etc. in the first place).
You are correct that the i version still use a file loaded into the BLU or the appropriate Crown amp(s). I know, I own some. The JBL 7 series are fantastic in that they bring about good engineering into a reasonably affordable turn key solution, but they aren't exactly what you are after. There are other speakers and this thread would be a great place to exposite speakers that meet the characteristics of well designed speakers with the science we know today.Let me first start off by pointing out a good reference on measurements of a lot of common speakers on the market using measurement techniques developed by Dr. Floyd Toole when he was at the NRC.https://www.soundstage.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16He subsequently refined those measurements into the spinorama that the Harmon facility used when he was there. He himself said that most of the info is there but not quite all. Ok, good enough place to start. At least they put forth the minimum amount of data needed to judge speaker performance which is still a boatload more than most speaker manufacturers provide.One thing worth addressing is that I think Harmon have shown that wider directivity is preferred all else being equal (that whitepaper in the other thread reiterated such a point). So speakers like the Revel Salon2 ($$$$) also hit all the marks of a good measuring speaker even though they aren't controlled directivity because of the super even off axis response and power response. There are reasons why one might wish to use controlled directivity and Dr. Geddes is a proponent of such. However, I don't think there is consensus that it is absolutely necessary for ideal SQ. I think this point is worth mentioning, but we can still discuss speakers that are controlled directivity.Last I heard Geddes moved onto active speakers, but he may still provide passive versions, I haven't looked. There are a number of DIY designs involving the SEOS waveguide that were designed with the same principles in mind but no one I know of has access to an anechoic chamber to confirm if they really hit all the marks, but at least we know they probably do above ~500hz or so, which is the most crucial part IMO.I think Danley Sound Lab Synergy speakers probably hit most of the marks but have fairly narrow directivity. It seems as though a good chunk of the studio monitor crowd has addressed the controlled directivity and/or off axis performance as we are seeing waveguides on tweeters more ubiquitously that ever before but I don't have a lot of experience with this market.
P.S. I don't wish to discuss this point here as it will derail the thread, but maybe we can discuss it elsewhere or in private. I don't get this point at all. The circle of confusion is term for the intellectual confounding of two vastly different things and only enlightens what the fundamentals should be for good speaker measurements regards of which speaker it is. The M2 isn't unique in trying to acheive this goal at all.
No need to dwell too much on this, Josh, and I really wasn't trying to poke the bear with a broader music reproduction industry philosophical debate. With this statement, I was simply, for sake of keeping the discussion on the speakers out there today that meet the original criteria, trying to head off any immediate and dismissive derailments stating that looking for such a thing (as an offshoot of the JBL speakers conversation) is, "useless," because one (the speakers) without the other (the active/DSP processing) is both a complete contradiction to and the antithesis of the fundamental design concept of the (JBL) speaker system that inspired the thread in the first place. Unfortunately, I was unsuccessful in this as (with all due respect) that was literally the first thing Anand posted immediately below you! Anand, I get where you're coming from, and nothing but love, but my hope here was to try to see what (else?) is out there right now in terms of getting as close to putting a round peg ("modern" speaker design) into a square hole ("traditional" audiophile stereo rigs) as can be had with speakers currently on the market. [Deleted before posting: a slight tangent that TL:DR said that I wouldn't consider trying to engineer a speaker myself]All that aside, so far I've read about Revel (also from Harman group) and Danley. For years I've read folks online praise Danley designs, and please do offer up details for folks to get up to speed on what's currently going on in the Danley shop. If I were shopping for myself right now instead of just OP-ing a general discussion on the subject, my little space would unfortunately have me looking at things a wee bit smaller than Danley's designs.Thanks everyone and keep the ideas coming! Although it is starting to sound like the general answer is that there is very little out there that hits all the mentioned check boxes, at least this conversation can serve as an easy to find reference for anyone looking for such unicorns.
Anand, what about horn speakers? They seem to be discussed less around here probably since they tend to be very expensive.
What do you think about Cessaro type horns?
Recently I was pm’d by an AC’er who wanted me to look at measurements of a Klipsch design from their pro division. It looked promising as well. Here it is: https://f072605def1c9a5ef179-a0bc3fbf1884fc0965506ae2b946e1cd.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/product-specsheets/KI-396-SMA-II-Data-Sheet-v05.pdf
RE: Klipsch KI-396-SMA-II . Wow - 101dB sensitivity with peaks of 133dB. This is a real "play to your neighborhood" type of speaker.And 60-18kHz +- 3dB. Looks like they are not fudging the frequency response either.I wonder if this could be used as a foghorn in the maritime regions. -dGB
Page created in 0.046 seconds with 28 queries.