The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Amphion, ATC, Gethein, Focal, cabinet design
Old 4th February 2016
  #31
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
I know about dipoles, of course, but was not thinking about electrostatics in this instance.
A dipole speaker can be realized with electrodynamic drivers as well.

Quote:
I do know about PA loudspeakers that are cardioid - but we were talking about studio monitors in this thread, not PA loudspeakers.
Well you said "all loudspeakers" and I'm not talking about PA speakers specifically either.. just speakers. After all speakers have to obey the laws of physics no matter what we like to call them. :-)

Quote:
And if you are referring to a website, it would be nice to post the link so I can find it.
Never heard of Siegfried Linkwitz?

Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design
Old 4th February 2016
  #32
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood View Post
Yes it is true, everything is a set of compromises in speaker design. I personally cringe anytime I see a rear port because a lot of people will put those speakers right near a wall in a room that is already not very good which tends to cause even more problems..

These designs are not identical and even though they may share some similar attributes the end results are different.

Anyways, just my taste. I'm bowing out of this thread.
What about a rear-mounted passive radiator (Amphion)?
Old 4th February 2016
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexK View Post
What about a rear-mounted passive radiator (Amphion)?
Hint: Air particle velocity
Old 5th February 2016
  #34
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
Hint: Air particle velocity
I don't really understand. The air particle velocity will be the same as a passive radiator once outside the cabinet.

The only real difference between a passive radiator and a port is the nature of the acoustic impedance conversion...
Old 5th February 2016
  #35
Lives for gear
 
latestflavor's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petrus View Post

So what was your point?
i believe his point was that he can sound intelligent by copying from wikipedia bass reflex page.
Old 5th February 2016
  #36
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexK View Post
I don't really understand. The air particle velocity will be the same as a passive radiator once outside the cabinet.

The only real difference between a passive radiator and a port is the nature of the acoustic impedance conversion...
Close to the port opening and close to the PR there will be a clear difference. Unless the port has same opening area as the actie surface of the PR.

The ported solution will be more sensitive to nearby objects/surfaces.

Not a very big thing but if you get close to the back wall it will give different results by this mechanism.
Old 5th February 2016
  #37
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by latestflavor View Post
i believe his point was that he can sound intelligent by copying from wikipedia bass reflex page.
Old 5th February 2016
  #38
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
Close to the port opening and close to the PR there will be a clear difference. Unless the port has same opening area as the actie surface of the PR.

The ported solution will be more sensitive to nearby objects/surfaces.

Not a very big thing but if you get close to the back wall it will give different results by this mechanism.
I wonder just how close one has to be in order for that to have an effect. The same as the diameter of the port maybe?
Old 5th February 2016
  #39
Lives for gear
 

Something like that.
Old 5th February 2016
  #40
Lives for gear
 
gradivus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
Never heard of Siegfried Linkwitz?

Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design
That is some cool-looking stuff there regardless of how it sounds.

Have you heard these Audiop?

@ bcgood sounds like you hate user error more than ports

I personally never liked Genelecs sound (even the expensive models I heard in good rooms) and always got hate for it. Just my taste. Wouldn't blame anyone who chooses them though. Whatever let's one work better I say go for it.
Old 5th February 2016
  #41
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gradivus View Post
That is some cool-looking stuff there regardless of how it sounds.

Have you heard these Audiop?

I have heard the model called Orion and I started building similar speakers year 2000 or so.

Good stuff.
Old 5th February 2016
  #42
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gradivus View Post
That is some cool-looking stuff there regardless of how it sounds.

Have you heard these Audiop?

@ bcgood sounds like you hate user error more than ports

I personally never liked Genelecs sound (even the expensive models I heard in good rooms) and always got hate for it. Just my taste. Wouldn't blame anyone who chooses them though. Whatever let's one work better I say go for it.


Yup, that's been my exact experience.

Another great speaker that isn't talked about much but is very accurate in a sealed enclosure is the Neumann KH 310.

Well.. My latest thing has been learning a lot about room acoustics. Which is a deep rabbit hole indeed..
Old 6th February 2016
  #43
Lives for gear
 
gradivus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
I have heard the model called Orion and I started building similar speakers year 2000 or so.

Good stuff.
Very cool. Anything specific you find between these alternative designs that stands out compared to the usual suspects we often see used for monitoring? (p.s. haven't had a chance to scour that site yet... dinner)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood
Yup, that's been my exact experience.

Another great speaker that isn't talked about much but is very accurate in a sealed enclosure is the Neumann KH 310.

Well.. My latest thing has been learning a lot about room acoustics. Which is a deep rabbit hole indeed..
You'd puke (or at least cringe) if you saw what I had to deal with these days.

Same here. Have been playing vulture myself in the acoustics forums. Some things much easier to grasp than others. Fascinating stuff.
Old 6th February 2016
  #44
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gradivus View Post
Very cool. Anything specific you find between these alternative designs that stands out compared to the usual suspects we often see used for monitoring? (p.s. haven't had a chance to scour that site yet... dinner)
Less excitation of room modes and the relatively linear power response usually leads to a sound that is experienced as clean, natural and more "life-like".

In general you ned less room treatment to get a good sound with a speaker like this. Especially in the lows which is the most troublesome to get right due to the size of the absorbers you typically need to battle room modes in the 40Hz-200Hz range.

It's a more expensive way of building speakers though since you need to compensate for the loss of energy around the open baffle. The compensation means more drivers, bigger drivers, and drivers with better motors.

The lower the frequency the more pumpcapacity you need compared to a boxed driver. In the upper bass/lower mids it's not a very big deal, but if you want high SPL at 10Hz you may need ten to twenty times as many drivers as with a boxed solution.

As ususal, engineering is a question of compromises and a balance of several parameters.
Old 6th February 2016
  #45
Lives for gear
 
gradivus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
Less excitation of room modes and the relatively linear power response usually leads to a sound that is experienced as clean, natural and more "life-like".

In general you ned less room treatment to get a good sound with a speaker like this. Especially in the lows which is the most troublesome to get right due to the size of the absorbers you typically need to battle room modes in the 40Hz-200Hz range.

It's a more expensive way of building speakers though since you need to compensate for the loss of energy around the open baffle. The compensation means more drivers, bigger drivers, and drivers with better motors.

The lower the frequency the more pumpcapacity you need compared to a boxed driver. In the upper bass/lower mids it's not a very big deal, but if you want high SPL at 10Hz you may need ten to twenty times as many drivers as with a boxed solution.

As ususal, engineering is a question of compromises and a balance of several parameters.
Very cool. Thanks for the info, man. Will be checking out that site in more detail today.
Old 6th February 2016
  #46
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gradivus View Post
Very cool. Thanks for the info, man. Will be checking out that site in more detail today.
My pleasure. SL's site is really good reading.

Judging by how these kinds of speakers use to sound to me and the sound of the Orion, I don't doubt for a second the latest designs are among the best speakers that exist.
Old 6th February 2016
  #47
Lives for gear
 
gradivus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
My pleasure. SL's site is really good reading.

Judging by how these kinds of speakers use to sound to me and the sound of the Orion, I don't doubt for a second the latest designs are among the best speakers that exist.
On it now.

Won't detract from the thread anymore than to post this brief quote from the site, which is one of the best ways I think I've seen stereo briefly described and why we all may differ on taste and method:

Quote:
Hearing two strongly correlated sources of sound, either from earphones or two loudspeakers, is an unnatural phenomenon, from which the ear-brain apparatus is asked to draw an illusion of reality.
...
In the case of loudspeaker presentation there is already the distance between listener and speakers, which typically is perceived as the minimum distance to the illusionary aural scene or phantom scene. But that scene is usually hard bounded by the speakers, which are recognized by the brain and one or the other speaker is preferred as the source, when the listener moves a short distance away laterally from the "sweet spot"
Besides making great music we really are in a technical sense trying to make the perfect illusion. Engineers could be described as audiological illusionists, or the audiological magi if one prefers.
Old 6th February 2016
  #48
Quote:
Originally Posted by latestflavor View Post
i believe his point was that he can sound intelligent by copying from wikipedia bass reflex page.
Had to check that. Indeed a copy/paste.

@ bcgood : that is certainly allowed. But a friendly suggestion is to state the source next time. That's how to keep your credibility up
Old 6th February 2016
  #49
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood View Post
I'm sorry, I can't take any speaker seriously that has a bass port in the back
I'm sorry but I can't take a poster seriously if he show his ignorance by writing that sentence and also copy a whole text from wiki and make it look like he took some time to put his own thinking and knowledge down.

You have some work in front of you regarding credibility.
Old 6th February 2016
  #50
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post
I'm sorry but I can't take a poster seriously if he show his ignorance by writing that sentence and also copy a whole text from wiki and make it look like he took some time to put his own thinking and knowledge down.

You have some work in front of you regarding credibility.
I'm sorry that you are so intimidated by my opinion. I wasn't claiming that article as my own I just didn't take the time to copy and past the reference. Anyone can copy a section of the text and Google and find the Wiki page no big secret there. Someone called me ignorant for my opinion and I supported that opinion with technical details.

I really feel sorry for you guys. Your post comes across as so angry and frustrated. Go out and get some sunshine! Fill your room with rear ported speakers. Do what is going to make you feel fulfilled in audio. No one is stopping you. My stance remains the same. I am not a fan of ports in general and definitely not a fan off rear ports.
Old 6th February 2016
  #51
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood View Post
I'm sorry that you are so intimidated by my opinion. I wasn't claiming that article as my own I just didn't take the time to copy and past the reference. Anyone can copy a section of the text and Google and find the Wiki page no big secret there. Someone called me ignorant for my opinion and I supported that opinion with technical details.

I really feel sorry for you guys. Your post comes across as so angry and frustrated. Go out and get some sunshine! Fill your room with rear ported speakers. Do what is going to make you feel fulfilled in audio. No one is stopping you. My stance remains the same. I am not a fan of ports in general and definitely not a fan off rear ports.
I'm not intimidated or angry I just think it looks really bad not writing your own words and not mention the reference. And why would I even think about doing a serach of that text? Naturally I think it's your own "words" if you write it in a thred like this.

Ok, you're "against" ports, but how can we discuss it if what you write is not even your own words? The whole discussion becomes strange.

It's certainly not the end of the world if you dislike ports. ;-)
Old 6th February 2016
  #52
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiop View Post

Ok, you're "against" ports, but how can we discuss it if what you write is not even your own words? The whole discussion becomes strange.
Wait, we can't use technical papers to support our own opinions unless we have authored them? No copy and pasting allowed? Sorry but I work a lot of hours and it is much faster for me to copy and paste text from a Wiki page than to sit there and reword something for you.

So apparently we all have to have PhDs in physics and write our own technical papers to support any opinion that we post on Gearslutz. Let all future posters be warned!
Old 6th February 2016
  #53
Lives for gear
 
paul brown's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood View Post

So apparently we all have to have PhDs in physics and write our own technical papers to support any opinion that we post on Gearslutz. Let all future posters be warned!
not at all. just take the couple of seconds to cite a source if it is a direct copy.
Old 6th February 2016
  #54
Lives for gear
 

Ah common.. sorry if I upset you bc but surely you must understand what I mean?
Old 6th February 2016
  #55
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul brown View Post
not at all. just take the couple of seconds to cite a source if it is a direct copy.
I agree that citing sources is important and I have added the sources to the original post. Its Saturday and I have a lot more time today since I'm not working to defend myself and fight people on Gearslutz, yea! ; )
Old 6th February 2016
  #56
Lives for gear
 

Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump