[Daygloworange]

What speakers used the Neo 8s at RMAF?

The LS-6 and LS-9 line arrays both use GR's custom version Neo8 planars .

Cheers

[Danny Richie]

It looks like some of what has been said is a little bit misleading and it looks like you could use a solution. Allow me offer you one.

It also crosses lower, not that that necessarily matters much in this case.

The lower crossover point is a huge deal. One can even pretty easily hear the difference is resolution between the LS-6 and LS-9 with crossover points at 1kHz and 850Hz respectively.

Comparing them to the true type ribbons is really not even an comparison.

The ribbons really can't be used much at all below 2kHz. Even then distortion shoots right on up there. Forcing them lower is just asking for problems.

So when comparing the two types of drivers in an application where one is crossed below 1kHz and the other is crossed above 2kHz is kind of like bringing a knife to a gun fight. In one speaker you are comparing the 1 to 2kHz range of a really fast planar magnetic to a woofer in the other speaker.

Another issue with the ribbons is stated here:

With a single line of woofers there will always be a lobe to the left or right and if you build into the wall you won't be able to adjust the speaker angle.

With the crossover point at 2kHz or higher then there is always a dipped area either to the left or to the right as the time arrival of the two drivers offset enough to start cancelling each other out near the crossover point.

This is not an issue with the Neo's. A crossover point in the 850Hz to 1kHz range is in an area where the wavelengths are so long that even in an extreme off axis the delay is not long enough from one driver to the other to cause cancellation. The off axis response is great both ways.

If you use the Neo 8 that I am using in the LS-6 and LS-9 then the crossover point can be low enough that even with small woofers on each side of it you will still not have off axis cancellation problems. The center to center spacing of your woofers will be a shorter wavelength than the wavelength at the crossover point.

Then there is the tremendous difference in sound quality.

A cymbol for instance sounds very different in a ribbon verses in the planar magnetic. The ribbon catches the trailing edge okay and adds that bit of air that sounds right, but it completely misses the attack of the cymbol. The initial strike has what sounds like a muted peak to it with the ribbon. The ribbon smears out a bit and just doesn't get that first hit right.

Piano is another area where the planar magnetic nails it but the ribbons just don't.

I've been a dealer for Raven ribbons, and worked with a ton of the AC ribbons, and missed with a Fountek or two. If they were a better choice I'd be using them, but they really aren't close in this application.

Plus I have always been worried about the fragile nature of the ribbons in a line source. You could take one of those speakers outside for photos on a windy day and get every one of those ribbons stretched out and have to replace every one of them. The Neo's can literally be thrown across the street and bounced down the sidewalk and they'd still play fine.

One problem with the Neo design for arrays is that you'll have more comb filtering in the top octave than the Fountek.

This is not really true.

Your argument on increased comb-filtering with the Neo's is a good one. Hadn't actually considered that, but particularly for the Neo3 (which also has a lower radiating % than the Neo8 when arrayed) this is a potential issue. Hmmm... Scratch Head

Keep in mind that for one to cancel the other even in the top octave, the time arrival of the output of one tweeter has to be delayed enough compared to the other tweeter as to cause a cancelation.

And tweeters with equal lengths are pretty much the same in regard to vertical off axis coverage.

As a solution I can also let you have the custom version of the Neo 8 that I had made for LS series speakers. These have a DCR in the 6.5 ohm range. They have all five rows of magnets on the diaphragm (unlike the pdr version) and offer great horizontal dispersion just like the pdr version, but with better sensitivity. The back side is open just like the standard version. The top end is more extended as well. They will need to be placed in their own air space with a chamber no wider than they are and about 3" deep with damping material. Cost is $59 per unit. On 10 or more units I could knock 10% off of that though.

[Rick Craig]

Obviously there's quite a difference of opinion between myself and Danny so maybe I should put together an array shootout sometime in 2008. That will make it easier to compare and everyone can judge for themselves. I would make it open to other types of arrays as well.

[Daygloworange]

That will make it easier to compare and everyone can judge for themselves.

Isn't that what RMAF is for? 

Cheers

[Rick Craig]

That will make it easier to compare and everyone can judge for themselves.

Isn't that what RMAF is for? 

Cheers

Is your listening room not better than a hotel room? How about a bigger room?

[Daygloworange]

Is your listening room not better than a hotel room? How about a bigger room?

A room is what you make it. Room issues are easy enough to deal with.

Amassing a large audience to impress is a lot tougher.

Cheers

[Rick Craig]

Is your listening room not better than a hotel room? How about a bigger room?

A room is what you make it. Room issues are easy enough to deal with.

Amassing a large audience to impress is a lot tougher.

Cheers

We have quite a few audiophiles here plus the AV123 show here last summer had a good crowd. This isn't about "impressing" anyone but allowing people to hear how different designs perform.

[FredT300B]

Obviously there's quite a difference of opinion between myself and Danny so maybe I should put together an array shootout sometime in 2008. That will make it easier to compare and everyone can judge for themselves. I would make it open to other types of arrays as well.

I like this idea! Part of the event could be open for all to hear for themselves, but the official comparison should be a blind one judged by a panel of experienced listeners, like the Stereomojo Class D amps and small speakers shootouts. This might fit nicely into a Texas DIY 2008. 

[Attila]

Obviously there's quite a difference of opinion between myself and Danny so maybe I should put together an array shootout sometime in 2008. That will make it easier to compare and everyone can judge for themselves. I would make it open to other types of arrays as well.

Excellent idea! Obviously there are differences in how we judge the sound of the same drivers in fairly similar applications - I think a shootout in line with what StereoMojo have done would be a good way to get a better  understanding of why we perceive differently and to what extent the preferences of the reviewer plays a role.

...just make sure you have the right equipment for moving the speakers around...

[Attila]

The lower crossover point is a huge deal. One can even pretty easily hear the difference is resolution between the LS-6 and LS-9 with crossover points at 1kHz and 850Hz respectively.

A crossover point in the 850Hz to 1kHz range is in an area where the wavelengths are so long that even in an extreme off axis the delay is not long enough from one driver to the other to cause cancellation. The off axis response is great both ways.

If you use the Neo 8 that I am using in the LS-6 and LS-9 then the crossover point can be low enough that even with small woofers on each side of it you will still not have off axis cancellation problems. The center to center spacing of your woofers will be a shorter wavelength than the wavelength at the crossover point.

c-c of woofers (about 19cm) will actually be around 1/2 wavelength with a x-over below 1k, clearly on the safe side. I notice Jim G. references Urban et. al (2001) on below 1/2 wavelength c-c for array driver spacing as something of an ideal in terms of avoiding lobing issues - I expect this holds to some extent for MTM as well?

As for how audible the benefits of the lower x-over is, there may be some differences in opinion I suspect. Of course, a shootout with a broad panel of judges would help in generalizing results on these issues...

The Neo's can literally be thrown across the street and bounced down the sidewalk and they'd still play fine.

Hopefully not an issue, but as kids may be in the pipeline, the durability of an exposed driver could actually get to be important in the not to distant future.

Keep in mind that for one to cancel the other even in the top octave, the time arrival of the output of one tweeter has to be delayed enough compared to the other tweeter as to cause a cancelation.

And tweeters with equal lengths are pretty much the same in regard to vertical off axis coverage.

See your point here, and I am also a bit uncertain as to how audible this is. I see the Fountek and the Neo8 as pretty much equal in this regard, with the NEo3 at some disadvantage due it being shorter and not able to cross as low as the 8.

As a solution I can also let you have the custom version of the Neo 8 that I had made for LS series speakers. These have a DCR in the 6.5 ohm range. They have all five rows of magnets on the diaphragm (unlike the pdr version) and offer great horizontal dispersion just like the pdr version, but with better sensitivity. The back side is open just like the standard version. The top end is more extended as well. They will need to be placed in their own air space with a chamber no wider than they are and about 3" deep with damping material. Cost is $59 per unit. On 10 or more units I could knock 10% off of that though.

These are very interesting and certainly a strong contender!

I still have a bit of time to finalize the design (other things to finish first...), but I think I know about as much about the alternatives as I can right now - thanks a lot guys!

[Danny Richie]

Sure, a shoot out would be great. I think RMAF 2008 would be a good venue. I'm up for renting a ball room for it too, how about you Rick?

See your point here, and I am also a bit uncertain as to how audible this is. I see the Fountek and the Neo8 as pretty much equal in this regard, with the NEo3 at some disadvantage due it being shorter and not able to cross as low as the 8.

Comb filtering effects are not an issue with any of these drivers because of the close spacing. And if you use enough of them the Neo 3's can be crossed as low as 1kHz. I did that with the larger Epiphany design.

[Daygloworange]

Is your listening room not better than a hotel room? How about a bigger room?

A room is what you make it. Room issues are easy enough to deal with.

Amassing a large audience to impress is a lot tougher.

Cheers

We have quite a few audiophiles here plus the AV123 show here last summer had a good crowd. This isn't about "impressing" anyone but allowing people to hear how different designs perform.

Your not looking to impress anyone? That's an interesting marketing strategy.

There was a perfect opportunity at RMAF to allow people to hear how differences between your line arrays and many other designs. Why didn't you bring your line arrays there?

Sounds like you missed a great opportunity to educate a whole lot of people.

Cheers

[Rick Craig]

Is your listening room not better than a hotel room? How about a bigger room?

A room is what you make it. Room issues are easy enough to deal with.

Amassing a large audience to impress is a lot tougher.

Cheers

We have quite a few audiophiles here plus the AV123 show here last summer had a good crowd. This isn't about "impressing" anyone but allowing people to hear how different designs perform.

Your not looking to impress anyone? That's an interesting marketing strategy.

There was a perfect opportunity at RMAF to allow people to hear how differences between your line arrays and many other designs. Why didn't you bring your line arrays there?

Sounds like you missed a great opportunity to educate a whole lot of people.

Cheers

And you don't have a vested interest in this discussion... gimme a break. Maybe in 2008 I can educate you 

[Daygloworange]

And you don't have a vested interest in this discussion... gimme a break.

Not anymore than you do Rick. So that's a moot point.

Maybe in 2008 I can educate you 

I got all the education I needed. My purpose for going to RMAF this year was to get educated. I found out who's stuff was worthwile.

BTW, do you even know whether or not I was in your room?

Cheers

[RAW]

Ya a line array shoot out sounds great aa
But lets make it 100% fair in all spectrum's.

The contestants bring them to a room at RMAF ,not each others room's as we know as a fact some people dampend the heck out of the rooms and try to control the room issues with absorption the best possible and this would not be fair.

Back to the test room or shoot out room.

One of the rooms at RMAF not the smaller rooms but not a ball room.Why, well in the real world people who are purchasing but them into there home not a custom made ball room

Lets say the room which has a bed room off the right and has a good size listening area and this bead room would be a great spot to place the line arrays when not in the room and behind a cloth. This will give people a idea with out the line array's being a small room or a ball room .Plus how the line arrays work in the room this size.

And the room would be treated, which all parties have no say in brand nothing.They bring in the speakers and sit back.Nothing more.

Electronics would come in 100% un bias.

Selected last minute from someone at the show not related to any party who has a Line array in the shoot out.

How does that sound.

[Rick Craig]

It looks like some of what has been said is a little bit misleading and it looks like you could use a solution. Allow me offer you one.

It also crosses lower, not that that necessarily matters much in this case.

The lower crossover point is a huge deal. One can even pretty easily hear the difference is resolution between the LS-6 and LS-9 with crossover points at 1kHz and 850Hz respectively.

Comparing them to the true type ribbons is really not even an comparison.

The ribbons really can't be used much at all below 2kHz. Even then distortion shoots right on up there. Forcing them lower is just asking for problems.

So when comparing the two types of drivers in an application where one is crossed below 1kHz and the other is crossed above 2kHz is kind of like bringing a knife to a gun fight. In one speaker you are comparing the 1 to 2kHz range of a really fast planar magnetic to a woofer in the other speaker.

Another issue with the ribbons is stated here:

With a single line of woofers there will always be a lobe to the left or right and if you build into the wall you won't be able to adjust the speaker angle.

With the crossover point at 2kHz or higher then there is always a dipped area either to the left or to the right as the time arrival of the two drivers offset enough to start cancelling each other out near the crossover point.

This is not an issue with the Neo's. A crossover point in the 850Hz to 1kHz range is in an area where the wavelengths are so long that even in an extreme off axis the delay is not long enough from one driver to the other to cause cancellation. The off axis response is great both ways.

If you use the Neo 8 that I am using in the LS-6 and LS-9 then the crossover point can be low enough that even with small woofers on each side of it you will still not have off axis cancellation problems. The center to center spacing of your woofers will be a shorter wavelength than the wavelength at the crossover point.

Then there is the tremendous difference in sound quality.

A cymbol for instance sounds very different in a ribbon verses in the planar magnetic. The ribbon catches the trailing edge okay and adds that bit of air that sounds right, but it completely misses the attack of the cymbol. The initial strike has what sounds like a muted peak to it with the ribbon. The ribbon smears out a bit and just doesn't get that first hit right.

Piano is another area where the planar magnetic nails it but the ribbons just don't.

I've been a dealer for Raven ribbons, and worked with a ton of the AC ribbons, and missed with a Fountek or two. If they were a better choice I'd be using them, but they really aren't close in this application.

Plus I have always been worried about the fragile nature of the ribbons in a line source. You could take one of those speakers outside for photos on a windy day and get every one of those ribbons stretched out and have to replace every one of them. The Neo's can literally be thrown across the street and bounced down the sidewalk and they'd still play fine.

One problem with the Neo design for arrays is that you'll have more comb filtering in the top octave than the Fountek.

This is not really true.

Your argument on increased comb-filtering with the Neo's is a good one. Hadn't actually considered that, but particularly for the Neo3 (which also has a lower radiating % than the Neo8 when arrayed) this is a potential issue. Hmmm... Scratch Head

Keep in mind that for one to cancel the other even in the top octave, the time arrival of the output of one tweeter has to be delayed enough compared to the other tweeter as to cause a cancelation.

And tweeters with equal lengths are pretty much the same in regard to vertical off axis coverage.

As a solution I can also let you have the custom version of the Neo 8 that I had made for LS series speakers. These have a DCR in the 6.5 ohm range. They have all five rows of magnets on the diaphragm (unlike the pdr version) and offer great horizontal dispersion just like the pdr version, but with better sensitivity. The back side is open just like the standard version. The top end is more extended as well. They will need to be placed in their own air space with a chamber no wider than they are and about 3" deep with damping material. Cost is $59 per unit. On 10 or more units I could knock 10% off of that though.

You failed to mention that there are different ribbon materials available as well as different terminations. The Fountek CD2.0M is very reliable; in fact, I've had no failures in any speaker with this ribbon. That's pretty exceptional considering I probably buy more of them than any other comapny in the U.S.

As far as the rest I won't bother - time to let the speakers settle the issue 

[Rick Craig]

And you don't have a vested interest in this discussion... gimme a break.

Not anymore than you do Rick. So that's a moot point.

Maybe in 2008 I can educate you 

I got all the education I needed. My purpose for going to RMAF this year was to get educated. I found out who's stuff was worthwile.

BTW, do you even know whether or not I was in your room?

Cheers

Sure I have an interest business-wise but if I thought the planars were better I would buy them. They cost less than the Founteks but fall short in areas that make them less suitable for my application.

I didn't bring any arrays this year because I wanted to show some other new designs. I may do some shows in 2008 with arrays. If you came to my room I don't remember you identifying yourself.

[Daygloworange]

As far as the rest I won't bother - time to let the speakers settle the issue 

You had the opportunity to do just that with your line arrays in front of thousands of people a few weeks ago, yet you didn't, which makes all this talk strictly academic.

I didn't bring any arrays this year because I wanted to show some other new designs.

Personally, I would have brought my flagship speakers to RMAF, but that's just me.

Cheers

[Daygloworange]

If you came to my room I don't remember you identifying yourself.

I didn't know you'd care....

Cheers

[Rick Craig]

Sure, a shoot out would be great. I think RMAF 2008 would be a good venue. I'm up for renting a ball room for it too, how about you Rick?

See your point here, and I am also a bit uncertain as to how audible this is. I see the Fountek and the Neo8 as pretty much equal in this regard, with the NEo3 at some disadvantage due it being shorter and not able to cross as low as the 8.

Comb filtering effects are not an issue with any of these drivers because of the close spacing. And if you use enough of them the Neo 3's can be crossed as low as 1kHz. I did that with the larger Epiphany design.

If a lower crossover point is better then how come you didn't use the Neo8's in the Epiphany designs? And yes they both have comb filtering in the top octave by virtue of the frequency's wavelength vs. the diaphragm length. Easy to measure.