Why single/wide bandwidth

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 19265 times.

Duke

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 1160
    • http://www.audiokinesis.com
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #20 on: 5 Aug 2011, 06:29 am »
I'm playing devil's advocate here because I think your argument uses a hand picked example that is not necessarily representative.

Not "representative" of what?  Of course it's not exactly like every other two-way speaker, but it does illustrate an issue that most have, which is not obvious from their on-axis curves.  Would you rather I use an example that is not as clear?   

If you wish to dispute the principle I described in my first post in this thread, you might want to formulate an argument and/or come up with some counter-examples.   
« Last Edit: 5 Aug 2011, 08:08 am by Duke »

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 9553
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #21 on: 5 Aug 2011, 03:42 pm »
The Lore (with a large "main" driver) should be good for older ears and the tweeter should help provide a wide dispersion of full range sound.

Check out the Audio Circle thread on the Lore.

neobop

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3448
  • BIRD LIVES
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #22 on: 7 Aug 2011, 03:09 am »
Duke,
After thinking about this a bit, you are probably right about off-axis freq resp vs phase as a predictor of sound quality. Phase isn't usually considered unless there's a gross anomaly like a suck out. With multi driver speakers even if the phase difference is compensated there will usually be a difference between what happens at the crossover region and the rest of the band of the driver(s). It's not so easy to correlate with perceived sound quality.

The ear does not hear waveforms as such; rather, it deconstructs the incoming sound into energy at different frequencies.  So waveform fidelity is not nearly as important as eyeballing what happens to a square wave would lead one to believe.

This depends on what you consider important. Square waves are very good predictors of fidelity. This is true in electronics and in speakers. For instance, waveform fidelity usually shows the difference between a dynamic driver and a full range electrostatic. Differences can be dramatic.
Regards,
neo

JohnR

Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #23 on: 7 Aug 2011, 03:25 am »
Square waves are very good predictors of fidelity.

Only if the system is intended to be linear phase. Otherwise, the question comes back audibility of phase shift. Doing something as Linkwitz suggests (but digitally to make it easy to implement) would be interesting: http://www.linkwitzlab.com/phs-dist.htm

neobop

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3448
  • BIRD LIVES
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #24 on: 7 Aug 2011, 05:11 pm »
Interesting link, pardon the pun. I wonder if audibility results would be similar if the freq were 1K rather than 100Hz. Would doing this digitally have the same effect as putting the signal through discreet components?

Square waves reveal more than phase angle though. Things like rise time, slew rate, overshoot can be readily observed.
neo

Duke

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 1160
    • http://www.audiokinesis.com
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #25 on: 8 Aug 2011, 06:18 am »
After thinking about this a bit, you are probably right about off-axis freq resp vs phase as a predictor of sound quality. Phase isn't usually considered unless there's a gross anomaly like a suck out. With multi driver speakers even if the phase difference is compensated there will usually be a difference between what happens at the crossover region and the rest of the band of the driver(s). It's not so easy to correlate with perceived sound quality.

This depends on what you consider important. Square waves are very good predictors of fidelity. This is true in electronics and in speakers. For instance, waveform fidelity usually shows the difference between a dynamic driver and a full range electrostatic. Differences can be dramatic.

Fair enough.   

I don't share your opinion on the perceptual significance of square wave reproduction in loudspeakers (for reasons stated earlier), but do concede that it is an impressive feat of engineering for a speaker to reproduce a recognizeable square wave. 
« Last Edit: 8 Aug 2011, 10:20 pm by Duke »

JohnR

Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #26 on: 8 Aug 2011, 10:12 am »
I wonder if audibility results would be similar if the freq were 1K rather than 100Hz.

Only one way to find out! I suspect that 1K will be less audible than 100 Hz (assuming either are) but have not done the experiment. The question would however be easier to answer with digital as it's a matter of changing a few parameters rather than de/resoldering components.

Quote
Would doing this digitally have the same effect as putting the signal through discreet components?

I would think so. Except at the frequency extremes, digital filters are fairly close to their analog counterparts. The comparison would be simply turning the allpass filter on and off, so everything else will be the same.

Mikeinsacramento

Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #27 on: 15 Aug 2011, 05:07 pm »
Midrange is king (at any age) and that is where single driver designs shine.  As doorman indicates coherency (especially nearfield) is perfect.  Imaging (single point source) is ideal.  And by default single drivers are "active" (one channel of amplification per driver) which adds dynamics, allows the amplifier to "see" the simplier load easier, and increases depth/volume of bass significantly.

Crossovers may be necessary, but are always evil, especially in the midrange frequencies where the ear is most sensitive to phase mix ups.

If you've read through this circle you'll find no concensus on a definition of a single driver design.  The purists say one driver period, but that's hard to find that provide satisfying bass without sacrificing the highs.  Some say woofer with tweeter is OK if the tweeeter only has a capacity to protect it (no "real" crossover).  Others look towards a smaller driver with a subwoofer added.  Etc/etc.

For older ears I'd lean towards larger drivers that can handle more bass better.  OTOH smaller drivers "beam" high frequencies less.

The downside of single driver designs is that they don't handle  loud/complex types of music as well as muli-driver designs.  There is no perfect loudspeaker.

Also search for Planet10 and brinesacoustics.

I bought my first pair of speakers in 30 years a few months ago.  Spent a fair amount of time on this board doing some research.  After considering the severe room restrictions I have, I felt at the time I bought, that I was basically punting the decision.  Now I'm sure I did the right thing.  And the above post accurately describes the benefits of the little monitors I bought.




JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 9553
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #28 on: 15 Aug 2011, 07:32 pm »
Thanks for posting Mike.

I can't quite tell what brand/model those speakers are, could you tell us more?

TIA

chrisby

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 772
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #29 on: 15 Aug 2011, 07:40 pm »
Thanks for posting Mike.

I can't quite tell what brand/model those speakers are, could you tell us more?

TIA


Clark Blumenstein "Orca"  - Fostex FE83E in nice little BB birch plywood boxes - he also will do in Bamboo

very musical

http://www.blumenstein-ultra-fi.com/index.php?page=orca

TerryO

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 538
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #30 on: 15 Aug 2011, 09:01 pm »

Clark Blumenstein "Orca"  - Fostex FE83E in nice little BB birch plywood boxes - he also will do in Bamboo

very musical

http://www.blumenstein-ultra-fi.com/index.php?page=orca

Hi Chris,

Clark gave a demo at our Audio Club last month. He brought his Naga speakers with subs and complete Bottlehead system. Looked and sounded great!

Hope to see you this weekend!

Best regards,
TerryO

« Last Edit: 17 Aug 2011, 12:23 am by TerryO »

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 9553
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #31 on: 16 Aug 2011, 05:19 pm »
Thanks for the link.  Too small for my taste.

chrisby

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 772
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #32 on: 16 Aug 2011, 09:36 pm »
Thanks for the link.  Too small for my taste.


well then the Oninyanma might be more to your liking (line of credit permitting  :thumb:)


these I didn't (and at $14,7000 /pr maybe don't want to) hear



Count Olsonovavich, have you heard the little 85WK after their measles attack? 

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 9553
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #33 on: 16 Aug 2011, 09:46 pm »
Chris, now you're picking on me.   :oops:

I'm just a simple farm raised boy who could never bring himself to spend that kind of money on speakers (unless they came with a car or a super model).   :lol:

chrisby

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 772
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #34 on: 16 Aug 2011, 09:51 pm »
Chris, now you're picking on me.   :oops:

I'm just a simple farm raised boy who could never bring himself to spend that kind of money on speakers (unless they came with a car or a super model).   :lol:

true enough - I didn't pay much more than that for my new little Ranger last summer - but that's still less than the sales tax on some of the silly expense ego-gear out there





TerryO

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 538
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #35 on: 17 Aug 2011, 12:11 am »

well then the Oninyanma might be more to your liking (line of credit permitting  :thumb:)


these I didn't (and at $14,7000 /pr maybe don't want to) hear



Count Olsonovavich, have you heard the little 85WK after their measles attack?

The 85? No, Clark's Nagas were sans measles when he brought them to the meeting. They did sound pretty good, all the same.

I'd really like to hear a pair of his Oninyanma speakers!

Chris, when are you heading up the Mountain? Dave R and I plan to be there Thursday afternoon.
BTW: There's no reason to be so formal, just call me Terry.

Best Regards,
TerryO



 

chrisby

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 772
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #36 on: 22 Aug 2011, 04:30 pm »
For those interested,  both Clark's little speakers (Orca and Naga) use the FE83E (that could change) I don't think he'd had an opportunity to hear the new FF85WK until July 16th at Bud's place. 

Richard in Idaho

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 61
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #37 on: 26 Aug 2011, 07:23 pm »
As the OP thought I would post as to what I have ordered.
After reading and more reading and considering value for the money I ordered a pair of Salk Songbirds in custom veneer. Will post in the Salk circle after I get them. I want to tank every one that responded. 

frank111

Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #38 on: 1 Sep 2011, 12:23 am »
 I recently purchased the HoytBedford type 1's.  A single 8 inch driver in a beautiful wood enclosure, 48 to 18,000 freq.response, & 97 db rating.  I've had many speakers in the past decades (I'm 50 yrs young) and they all had multiple drivers. The sound that radiates from a pair of qualitly single source speakers is amazing- the soundstage & depth is unmatched. Jazz & opera are life like in my living room.

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 9553
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Why single/wide bandwidth
« Reply #39 on: 1 Sep 2011, 01:11 pm »
I recently purchased the HoytBedford type 1's.  A single 8 inch driver in a beautiful wood enclosure, 48 to 18,000 freq.response, & 97 db rating.  I've had many speakers in the past decades (I'm 50 yrs young) and they all had multiple drivers. The sound that radiates from a pair of qualitly single source speakers is amazing- the soundstage & depth is unmatched. Jazz & opera are life like in my living room.

Welcome to the fold!