The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Focal Unveils New Flagship Nearfield and Midfield Monitors: Trio11 Be
Old 29th January 2019
  #31
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason rocks View Post
Near fields are only a couple of feet from you, Mid fields due to their size you need to be further back and have a large enough room.
Minimum listening distance is actually a function of the crossover freq between the tweeter and the mid (or mid bass in a two way) and the center to center distance between them.

The rule of thumb in speaker design is to divide the speed of sound by the center to center spacing of the drivers to get a crossover frequency for a 1 meter listening distance.

In many cases 3 ways can actually allow a closer minimum listening distance because the distance between the mid and the tweeter is lower. Then again the smaller mid driver with a relatively low crossover frequency comes at the expense of a worse directivity index (no free lunches in speaker design).

In any case if we figure around 100mm center to center spacing here and the speed of sound is 343000mm/s, then 343000/100=3430Hz. Meaning that as long as the crossover is below that number, then this speaker has a relatively low minimum listening distance. If it is half that number, it has a very low one at just .5m.

The term 'near field' actually means the sound source is inside the critical distance, which is the point in a room where the SPL of reverberant energy is equal to the direct (in sum, not peak). If you look at amroc you will see that actual near field monitoring is pretty difficult to achieve unless the room is very large. If someone is only 2' or less the better choice would be a point-source speaker like a coaxial.
Old 29th January 2019
  #32
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Minimum listening distance is actually a function of the crossover freq between the tweeter and the mid (or mid bass in a two way) and the center to center distance between them.

The rule of thumb in speaker design is to divide the speed of sound by the center to center spacing of the drivers to get a crossover frequency for a 1 meter listening distance.

In many cases 3 ways can actually allow a closer minimum listening distance because the distance between the mid and the tweeter is lower. Then again the smaller mid driver with a relatively low crossover frequency comes at the expense of a worse directivity index (no free lunches in speaker design).

In any case if we figure around 100mm center to center spacing here and the speed of sound is 343000mm/s, then 343000/100=3430Hz. Meaning that as long as the crossover is below that number, then this speaker has a relatively low minimum listening distance. If it is half that number, it has a very low one at just .5m.

The term 'near field' actually means the sound source is inside the critical distance, which is the point in a room where the SPL of reverberant energy is equal to the direct (in sum, not peak). If you look at amroc you will see that actual near field monitoring is pretty difficult to achieve unless the room is very large. If someone is only 2' or less the better choice would be a point-source speaker like a coaxial.
minimal listening distance does not depend on crossover frequency or into how many bands the spectrum is split: one can easily listen to broadband, two- or three-way speakers regardless of crossover settings at any distance; positioning/angles/coupling/dispersion/spl/throw capacity etc. do matter but not the crossovers.

most coax designs use horns for the hf: it's not recommend using them at short distance, au contraire...

and while critical distance in recording of classical music may be worth some consideration upon mic selection and their positioning, it's certainly not an issue in a control room! (unless it is huge, has no acoustic treatment and monitors are way too small/underpowered for the size of the room)!
Old 29th January 2019
  #33
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
minimal listening distance does not depend on crossover frequency
Yes it does, here is a good explanation under the vertical directivity section-

Speaker lobing calculator – Polar response – Audio Judgement

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
most coax designs use horns for the hf: it's not recommend using them at short distance, au contraire...
There are many that don't (KEF, new genelec, unity boulder etc), but there is no technical reason horns can't be used at close range other than their size, which increases center to center spacing in a non-coaxial. A pair of danley SH50's sound excellent at close range.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
it's certainly not an issue in a control room! (unless it is huge, has no acoustic treatment and monitors are way too small/underpowered for the size of the room)!
My issue is with the term near field, which does have to do with critical distance- but agree, we should abandon that term. It has led to the myth that 2-ways are good for close listening and this isn't necessarily true, nor is it necessarily true that 3 or more way designs are bad for close listening.
Old 29th January 2019
  #34
Every studio I have seen equates near field monitors with smaller monitors and not ones that have a 10 inch woofer. With large monitors, you need to be further away to hear them in their proper context.

Personally I think it's a shame that the SM9's are no longer made. It was a great design and they sound great. But I have a feeling the Trios sold more due to their lower price, they could go louder, and the updated option on switching between 3 way and 2 way was nicer on them.
Old 29th January 2019
  #35
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason rocks View Post
Every studio I have seen equates near field monitors with smaller monitors
Sure it's a common name that misuses a technical term. But it is for sure common.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason rocks View Post
With large monitors, you need to be further away to hear them in their proper context.
This is simply not true.
Old 29th January 2019
  #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Sure it's a common name that misuses a technical term. But it is for sure common.



This is simply not true.
Well Hugh (who worked for the BBC for years) from Sound in Sound when into detail with me on why it's true especially when you have to consider the room size but I won't argue the point and just will state what I was told by several professionals
Old 29th January 2019
  #37
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Yes it does, here is a good explanation under the vertical directivity section-

Speaker lobing calculator – Polar response – Audio Judgement
of course every speaker has more directivity towards higher frequencies but just after a few centimeters, the 'beams' overlap/combine: you are getting the same sound at your chosen listening position, regardless of what crossover settings a manufacturer came up with.

you can easily test this by adjusting the settings of a speaker controller going into amps driving passive speakers...


Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
There are many that don't (KEF, new genelec, unity boulder etc), but there is no technical reason horns can't be used at close range other than their size, which increases center to center spacing in a non-coaxial. A pair of danley SH50's sound excellent at close range.
thx for the hint on some non-horn coax designs - i cannot agree on your comment on horn-loaded speakers though: while i luv danley speakers for luve mixing (and it's a shame that they are not getting more attention in europe), i'm pretty much sure they don't measure or sounds nice a short distance - and they don't have to: the purpose of a horn is to 'steer' sound and to get some throw capacity so they perform well at some distance!

by the way: my tad/augspurger mains use horns and i spend most of my mixing time behind tannoy coax hornloaded speakers - while there is no technical reason not to use them at short distance there is a lot of aesthetic reason not to do so - just don't: i promise you would't like it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
My issue is with the term near field, which does have to do with critical distance- but agree, we should abandon that term. It has created the myth that 2-ways are good for close listening and this isn't necessarily true, nor is it necessarily true that 3 or more way designs are bad for close listening.
here we seem to agree (to some extent): the amount of frequency bands is not (much) related to listening distance.

i refer to 1-3m for nearfields, 2-5m for mid fields and maybe 5-10m for 'large mains' throw capacity' (and would not use the term 'far field') - as we speak of it: i cannot remember sitting in a control room with mains further away than ca. 5m.

and pls note that the same terminology gets used in a much different way in live sound!
Old 29th January 2019
  #38
Lives for gear
Here is some good info from genelec-

https://www.genelec.com/sites/defaul...de_ed_2015.pdf

You can see that the 8351 and 8260 have some of the lower minimum distances in spite of being larger 3 way designs.

The large soffit mounted designs then are designed for a greater listening distance, if you look at them the drivers are spaced further apart due to the waveguides- the further apart the drivers are (given the same crossover frequency) the further the minimum listening distance.

Their description of why-

When too close to the monitor, the
drivers - tweeter or midrange/tweeter
- are not summing together properly at
the crossover point, which affects the
perceived frequency response balance.
Old 29th January 2019
  #39
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
of course every speaker has more directivity towards higher frequencies but just after a few centimeters, the 'beams' overlap/combine:
The lobes continue out indefinitely, so if this is the lobing of a given speaker, it will continue to have a null in the response at that frequency for forever at +/- 30 degrees in an anechoic environment.

You probably use steep slopes with your Lake? If so this pushes the lobes a bit further out, and makes the nulls deeper and higher q. You would have to measure full vertical polars with a small degree increment to find them. Considering the drivers are still placed next to each other, it's true that with steeper slopes this becomes less of an issue as there is less and less of an overlap region where both speakers are summing (or nulling).

All to the point that the overall design of the speaker determines min distance, not the size of the biggest woofer.
Attached Thumbnails
Focal Unveils New Flagship Nearfield and Midfield Monitors: Trio11 Be-n160fig2.png  

Last edited by RyanC; 29th January 2019 at 04:57 PM..
Old 29th January 2019
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Shaggy2039's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Here is some good info from genelec-

https://www.genelec.com/sites/defaul...de_ed_2015.pdf

You can see that the 8351 and 8260 have some of the lower minimum distances in spite of being larger 3 way designs.

The large soffit mounted designs then are designed for a greater listening distance, if you look at them the drivers are spaced further apart due to the waveguides- the further apart the drivers are (given the same crossover frequency) the further the minimum listening distance.

Their description of why-

When too close to the monitor, the
drivers - tweeter or midrange/tweeter
- are not summing together properly at
the crossover point, which affects the
perceived frequency response balance.
The a bit off topic but when I turn my Focal Twins standing upright vs horizontal the sound is very very different. The sound much more focused and punchy. The imaging is almost holographic. Is this akin to what we're talking about here? The reasoning being that the bass, mid and tweeters are no longer firing on the same horizontal plane and when vertical the bass in firing on it's own plane, the mids on their own along with the tweeters. This is why The Focal's are so crazy to me - and I'm sure the Trio11's would sound very different depending on how they're placed.
Old 29th January 2019
  #41
News Desk Editor
 
The Press Desk's Avatar
 

Old 29th January 2019
  #42
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Press Desk View Post
https://youtu.be/NmpwPdEUt6k
Well he said it-

"you can use it nearfield and midfield up to 4 meters".
Old 29th January 2019
  #43
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy2039 View Post
Is this akin to what we're talking about here?
Maybe, there is a lot going on between speakers, a room and a desk/console etc...typically we orient tweeters and woofers vertically because we expect to be moving around less in the vertical domain, while moving more in the horizontal.

Lobing simply means there will be a dip in the frequency response when you get off axis at some point as there is a null- this is the point where both drivers are playing and the flight path from the woofer is 1/2 wavelength of the flight path of the tweeter (or vise versa) so the two are out of phase and cancel each other out. If they were both full range sources they would comb filter the rest of the way up...

The twins are interesting there because the tweeter isn't oriented vertically to the woofer either way...also as I understand the left/right switch on the back determines which woofer plays up to the tweeter and which is the .5 woofer that rolls in at the baffle step frequency. So the way you orient them can have a lot to do with excitation of room modes. Lot's of variables there...
Old 29th January 2019
  #44
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
...
All to the point that the overall design of the speaker determines min distance, not the size of the biggest woofer.
i didn't say that! - but i keep on saying that minimum distance is nothing to consider/not relevant for anyone around here (assuming nobody listens at 30cm from huge 4-way cabinets in a tiny room).

and it's irrelevant how far lobes extend: the radiation pattern of separated woofers/tweeters/horns overlap pretty quickly on axis:/no one can detect a small offset of speakers of a few degrees: one can measure small phase offsets but we're not very sensitive to phase unless it's out of whack (if so, that's what i'm using my lakes and other gear for to correct in addition to the obvious tasks)
Old 29th January 2019
  #45
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
and it's irrelevant how far lobes extend: the radiation pattern of separated woofers/tweeters/horns overlap pretty quickly on axis:/no one can detect a small offset of speakers of a few degrees: one can measure small phase offsets but we're not very sensitive to phase unless it's out of whack (if so, that's what i'm using my lakes and other gear for to correct in addition to the obvious tasks)
Lobing happens when the phase is out by 180 degrees. If you have any two sources playing the same signal that are more than 1/4 wavelength away from each other, they will comb filter at any point where the flight path of each is different enough that they are out of phase with each other.

If you picture the speaker in the pic I posted above, as you move progressively off axis going up, the distance from the center of the woofer becomes longer than the center of the tweeter (simple triangulation). Due to the relatively slow speed of sound, and relatively short wavelengths of the relevent frequencies, the longer flight path is enough to be 1/2 wavelength delayed relative to the other. This causes a null at that angle. The higher the crossover frequency the shorter the wavelengths, and the further apart the drivers are from each other, the more dramatic the triangulation distance is. This is why crossover frequency and center to center distance determine minimum listening distance.

In order to have a speaker that is good for close listening, we need to make sure that it has a large enough lobe-free-window. If we are only 2' from the speaker, and we want a 2' tall lobe-free-window, that requires that the lobing happens at a more obtuse angle (so we need closer c2c spacing, and lower crossover point). If the listener is further away, the angle can be more acute to still achieve a 2' tall lobe-free-window.
Old 29th January 2019
  #46
Lives for gear
 

i don't care much which diagrams you're using to underlign your point: fact is that for real world experience, it's pretty much irrelevant - and if one should experience any issues as you predict (meaning being of importance for both listening and measuring), one can still use dsp to adjust...

btw: i could underlign my point of view by posting measurements of fr response/spl levels/phase plots etc. of different settings reading (almost) the same but frankly, i feel this duscussion is a bit exhausting: nevermind and good luck with your installatiions!
Old 29th January 2019
  #47
Here for the gear
i can understand the appeal of these guys. able to go louder and remote switch. I can also understand some of the negative comments of the sm9. I have the sm9's and I can compare them to my opals which I use for a secondary setup.. The bottom end of the sm9's is different from the Opals.. The bottom end of the opals you can feel and while the sm9's can go lower, the bottom end on the sm9's is not as solid.. and the sm9's can clip more easily.. But everything else on the sm9 is fantastic to me.. what made it better though was I added a sub, which goes lower and gives more of that classic low end punch, while also lessening the load on the sm9 and allowing me to go a lot louder.. couldn't be happier..
Old 30th January 2019
  #48
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
The term 'near field' actually means the sound source is inside the critical distance, which is the point in a room where the SPL of reverberant energy is equal to the direct (in sum, not peak).
Your definition of the term "near field" as it relates to critical distance is indeed how it's used in some cases, but is not the only valid definition/use. (IMHO would rather be more clear to refer to as "direct field.")

"Near field" as it relates to speakers and perception is defined in geometric terms. Geometric near field is defined as that region close to a source where the sound pressure does not vary as the inverse of the distance from a source.
"Near field" can also be used in the hydrodynamic sense, where particle velocity and acoustic pressure is out of phase.

More relevant to the current subject, "near field" listening is an issue with speakers with significant driver displacement due to 1)the angular separation between drivers enabling the ear-brain to localize individual frequency bands and 2)off-axis positioning of the listener to one or more drivers.

Speaker lobing between two drivers that you've linked in another post is a separate issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
of course every speaker has more directivity towards higher frequencies but just after a few centimeters, the 'beams' overlap/combine: you are getting the same sound at your chosen listening position, regardless of what crossover settings a manufacturer came up with.
Not so, the "beams" do not "overlap/combine" in a predictable fashion in the geometric near field, and certainly not in just a few centimeters away from a 2-way speaker.
Quote:
thx for the hint on some non-horn coax designs - i cannot agree on your comment on horn-loaded speakers though: while i luv danley speakers for luve mixing (and it's a shame that they are not getting more attention in europe), i'm pretty much sure they don't measure or sounds nice a short distance - and they don't have to: the purpose of a horn is to 'steer' sound and to get some throw capacity so they perform well at some distance!
Horn or no horn, coax designs exhibit less geometric near field issues than speaker designs with driver displacement. (Good) coax speakers can produce very close to its far field response at close distances. It should be self-evident why given the above explanation of issues regarding localization of bands and off-axis positioning.
Old 30th January 2019
  #49
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeky83 View Post
More relevant to the current subject, "near field" listening is an issue with speakers with significant driver displacement due to 1)the angular separation between drivers enabling the ear-brain to localize individual frequency bands and 2)off-axis positioning of the listener to one or more drivers.
Interesting, would it be correct to assume that the same issues drive this? IE a function of center to center distance vs crossover frequency? I would think if the drivers were closer together, or the crossover frequency was lower, it would be more difficult to localize each driver...
Old 30th January 2019
  #50
I heard the smaller Trios and they were amazing. I am sure these bigger monitors sound great for mid fields cranking the tunes in the studio with the extra low end.
Old 30th January 2019
  #51
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Interesting, would it be correct to assume that the same issues drive this? IE a function of center to center distance vs crossover frequency? I would think if the drivers were closer together, or the crossover frequency was lower, it would be more difficult to localize each driver...
Yup, agreed.
Old 4th February 2019
  #52
Lives for gear
 
JblKid95's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy2039 View Post
My buddy has the trios and it's the same thing. It's not a port - it's a handle so you can grab it and rotate the baffle if needed.
It’s a port, but also doubles as a handle

Last edited by JblKid95; 9th March 2019 at 04:21 PM..
Old 4th February 2019
  #53
Lives for gear
 
JblKid95's Avatar
 

I wonder if you can use the new mid driver in the trio6...
Old 5th February 2019
  #54
Lives for gear
 
mike vee's Avatar
I would never buy another Focal product. I had problems with all 4 Focal products I've owned. Plus, the Neumann monitors blow Focal away.
Old 15th March 2019
  #55
Here for the gear
 

Just got my Focal11 Be’s yesterday. Absolutely incredible. I literally can’t imagine a more flawless sound across the spectrum.

As far as reliability issues, for a few hundred bucks, Focal offers a five year coverage plan including overnight replacement.

I am done. These things are incredible.
Old 15th March 2019
  #56
Lives for gear
 
kelvyn's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JblKid95 View Post
I wonder if you can use the new mid driver in the trio6...
Good point!
Would be great if Focal would take my Trio 6’s towards getting the 11’s
Old 15th March 2019
  #57
Lives for gear
 
JblKid95's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kelvyn View Post
Good point!
Would be great if Focal would take my Trio 6’s towards getting the 11’s
Lol. The trio6 is kinda too big for my room already. Can’t imagine the 11. From what I heard. it’s lower distortion in the midrange and higher spl. i bet the low end character is the same just extended by 5 hz. Trios are already clean, so whatever the audible changes are, I doubt you’re missing much
Old 19th March 2019
  #58
Lives for gear
 
cheu78's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JblKid95 View Post
Lol. The trio6 is kinda too big for my room already. Can’t imagine the 11. From what I heard. it’s lower distortion in the midrange and higher spl. i bet the low end character is the same just extended by 5 hz. Trios are already clean, so whatever the audible changes are, I doubt you’re missing much
what are you getting instead of your trio6?

Just out of curiosity..



Cheu
Old 19th March 2019
  #59
Lives for gear
 
JblKid95's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheu78 View Post
what are you getting instead of your trio6?

Just out of curiosity..



Cheu
I’m not getting the scm25s lol. Def prefer the focal sound to atc. I’ll let you know as soon as I get something
Old 19th March 2019
  #60
Lives for gear
 
cheu78's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JblKid95 View Post
I’m not getting the scm25s lol. Def prefer the focal sound to atc. I’ll let you know as soon as I get something
was just curious..



Cheu
Topic:
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