High efficiency speakers appreciation and discussions

[thermonicavenger]

Next to the Josephson C 42 mic resides the KV2 EX10 flute rig in keeping with the high efficiency theme. Where it really matters LIVE.

Cheers Dave.

I think there is a little more going on than a deliberate dumming down of the market. This has happened in conjuncton though. Remember when Australian Hi Fi used to have blind listening tests of reviewed products auditioned by 7 or 9 individuals. I think there is almost a form of Hi Fi cognitive dissonance. Like its all too hard so I will pretend it isn't so. Remember the market can only respond to OUR desires. Manipulation is an expensive option. The crazy thing is now with Digital technology it makes it accessable by the less tech savvy like me. Ive had a mini DSP XO on my want to try list for some time. Just other priorities get in the way.

Edited February 21, 2016 by thermonicavenger

[Sub Sonic]

Just stepping back to "objectivism v subjectivism" for a minute, I was just having a look on the Orpheus website and I think they speak for the vast majority of speaker manufacturers, balancing objective v subjective testing.

"A good loudspeaker creates the illusion of being at a musical performance and lets you hear the emotional message that the performer has woven into the music. At first this might seem to be the wrong answer, particularly if you are of a technical bent. Some designers might say, "The magnitude and phase should be so and so." or "The cumulative spectral decay must exhibit x dB of clean decay in the first y milliseconds". For Orpheus, there are a myriad of measurements and assessments which must be performed before the loudspeaker is approved for shipping. Above and beyond all the measurements, the final decision on each pair of speakers is always made after intense listening sessions."

Measurements are very important in speaker design, but the final design is only released after listening and fine tuning with the ears. So, far from being mutually exclusive, they are mutually inclusive.

Regards,

SS

Edited February 21, 2016 by Sub Sonic

[thermonicavenger]

Couldn't have said it better. Would have saved some rsi. All a question of balance.

[Guest]

  On 21/02/2016 at 7:01 AM, thermonicavenger said:

 Ive had a mini DSP XO on my want to try list for some time.

You will enjoy that. 

Grab a mic as well.

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 6:25 AM, 125dBmonster said:

They don't look too bad   may grow on you after a few weeks

I bet they sound great.

Stupid, crazy great. I'm in audio heaven. My 300B has brought it all together.

[Guest]

  On 21/02/2016 at 2:02 AM, mwhouston said:

Retro-thermionic "VoXGrandious" re-assembled, painted and now driven by my new repaired 300B. Different bass response with nodes at 80, 63 and a slight fall at 50 to come back at 40 and now with better output at 31hz. My DIY 300B (The Silver Dragon) produces 8W but excellent bass response with 30W Hammond OPTs.

Very articulated bass. The top end goes to 52Khz.

What about a black sheepskin on the floor in front and a better photo with the big camera.

Have had a good time watching those go together, thanks for sharing. I like the idea of concentric and coaxial drivers.

Obviously with the bass response the ported enclosure works well

Edited February 21, 2016 by Guest

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 11:49 AM, 125dBmonster said:

What about a black sheepskin on the floor in front and a better photo with the big camera.

Have had a good time watching those go together, thanks for sharing. I like the idea of concentric and coaxial drivers.

Obviously with the bass response the ported enclosure works well

I have a big camera but I'm just bone lazy. OK better picks to follow.

[mwhouston]

  On 20/02/2016 at 12:08 PM, thermonicavenger said:

Cheers Dave. The dipole looks very similar to the linkwitz version. Dig the corner loaded bass horn

@ mwhouston.

I can have a tendancy to rub people the wrong way. Even when agreeing with them. If that happened it was non intentional.

What can I say its a gift that seems to just keep on giving. Cheers

I always say if you are going to give it, be prepared to take it. Good healthy banter, having a crack and taking the p**s. As long as you do it with a smile.

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 11:49 AM, 125dBmonster said:

What about a black sheepskin on the floor in front and a better photo with the big camera.

Have had a good time watching those go together, thanks for sharing. I like the idea of concentric and coaxial drivers.

Obviously with the bass response the ported enclosure works well

Mate swim the channel and I'll give you lunch and an afternoon of good music. Drinks are on me.

[thermonicavenger]

@ Matt I need a one size fits all mic. Will be moving the C42 on & that will be replaced with a EV RE20. That is flatter after 5 k & can do speaker measurement as well as flute duties.

@ Mark Those speakers of yours look eerily like my Chevoits. A sort of faux Tannoy.

Enjoy the music.

[Guest]

  On 21/02/2016 at 2:01 PM, mwhouston said:

Mate swim the channel and I'll give you lunch and an afternoon of good music. Drinks are on me.

Hi Mark, gracious offer I' may take you up on that in the not too distant future, as long as I can bring some records too.

Thanks Man

Cheers. 

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 9:43 PM, 125dBmonster said:

Hi Mark, gracious offer I' may take you up on that in the not too distant future, as long as I can bring some records too.

Thanks Man

Cheers.

Of course.

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 2:37 PM, thermonicavenger said:

@ Matt I need a one size fits all mic. Will be moving the C42 on & that will be replaced with a EV RE20. That is flatter after 5 k & can do speaker measurement as well as flute duties.

@ Mark Those speakers of yours look eerily like my Chevoits. A sort of faux Tannoy.

Enjoy the music.

Well they are concentric drivers and yes, Tannoy like. There has to be some acoustic advantage having the tweeter buried in the woofer. Single point of emission. The tweeter in these is a 2" titanium and Mylar type. 16ohms impedance and 105db efficient.

[Guest]

  On 21/02/2016 at 10:05 PM, mwhouston said:

Well they are concentric drivers and yes, Tannoy like. There has to be some acoustic advantage having the tweeter buried in the woofer. Single point of emission. The tweeter in these is a 2" titanium and Mylar type. 16ohms impedance and 105db efficient.

I've become a fan of the single point speaker system (well above uni directional frequency) and now with cheaper fully digital correction filter crossovers they are easy to tame, particularly the most efficient designs.

[Sub Sonic]

  On 21/02/2016 at 7:01 AM, thermonicavenger said:

The crazy thing is now with Digital technology it makes it accessable by the less tech savvy like me. Ive had a mini DSP XO on my want to try list for some time.

Woo Hoo!!! Look what just landed on my desk not 5 minutes ago!!! :) :)

I've been meaning to try one for quite a while now and finally bit the bullet last week.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Sub Sonic

[mwhouston]

  On 21/02/2016 at 10:29 PM, Sub Sonic said:

Woo Hoo!!! Look what just landed on my desk not 5 minutes ago!!! :) :)

I've been meaning to try one for quite a while now and finally bit the bullet last week.

20160222_085530.jpg

Good luck.

[Guest]

  On 21/02/2016 at 10:30 PM, mwhouston said:

Good luck.

Don't need luck,  just some time to get the thing working, aligned and never touch again. I love my miniDSP 2x8 in box with all the digital in/out/volume pot option. It became my pre amp, PC/DAC and TT as source units.

No more ratting through boxes for inductors/caps/resistors, just "click, click" of the mouse 

Edit, the most efficient speakers can need lots of attenuation and response rectification with resistor pads and complex LC networks, easily tamed with the digital PEQ and in MVHO the best way forward for DIY and experimentation.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Guest

[davewantsmoore]

  On 21/02/2016 at 9:43 AM, Sub Sonic said:

Just stepping back to "objectivism v subjectivism" for a minute, I was just having a look on the Orpheus website and I think they speak for the vast majority of speaker manufacturers, balancing objective v subjective testing.

"A good loudspeaker creates the illusion of being at a musical performance and lets you hear the emotional message that the performer has woven into the music. At first this might seem to be the wrong answer, particularly if you are of a technical bent. Some designers might say, "The magnitude and phase should be so and so." or "The cumulative spectral decay must exhibit x dB of clean decay in the first y milliseconds". For Orpheus, there are a myriad of measurements and assessments which must be performed before the loudspeaker is approved for shipping. Above and beyond all the measurements, the final decision on each pair of speakers is always made after intense listening sessions."

Measurements are very important in speaker design, but the final design is only released after listening and fine tuning with the ears. So, far from being mutually exclusive, they are mutually inclusive.

 

Indeed they are.   At some point, you must include some compromises in a speaker .... and at some point you must assess the 'audibleness' of said compromise(s) in order to choose.

 

It's a very pertinent point from Brad about the balance between objectivity and subjectivity (and using them where they belong).

 

 

Much of the promotion (or "drivel" as many probably see it, heh)  of "objectivity" on a forum like this, is to do with people not using subjectivity to determine what the errors in a speaker (or whatever product) actually ARE.     You can't reliably listen to a speaker and then say "oh theres some reflections from X" .... or the CSD is too long .... or there's a bit of a bump in the midrange.     People just simply can't do that by ears, even very experienced people.   Humans are terrible at it ..... and aside from the "human condition" we only have to look and see that if you move your head an inch, the response may change quite a lot.

 

You objectively determine what those issues ARE .... and then do subjective testing to see which are acceptable compromises.

 

Of course, that's for designing a speaker....   and so it doesn't really apply to the general punter very well.     Consumers will usually give the product a "do I like it" test which is completely subjective.    These types of evaluation can be easily corrupted unfortunately .....  so it can be a bit worrying to have your product testing in some uncontrolled way, and just have to hope that it does better subjectively than the competition in the situation thrown up.

[davewantsmoore]

  On 21/02/2016 at 10:41 PM, 125dBmonster said:

in MVHO the best way forward for DIY and experimentation.

 

I think the best way full stop.... for a few reasons, in no particular order.

 

• If L, C, and R quality (as opposed to value) have such a big effect on the sound, then they ALL are surely severely colouring the sound, and do not belong in a high quality speaker
• L, C, and R values are a pain to measure and get correct to a tolerance (at least in any large quantity), and could drift over time too.   This becomes more and more critical as the complexity of the filter increases
• The are many many situations where the type of correction you may want to make to a driver is simply not possible (practical) using a passive network   (the most important IMO)

 

I've built passive networks for speakers where the person didn't want extra electronics, but it's hardly worth it IMO.    Size and cost are going down fast, for the DIYer.   I want DSP and amplifiers inside my speakers, but it's JUST out of reach for anyone who doesn't have a big setup budget.     Soon.

[Guest]

@@davewantsmoore

Agree, with the amps at the speakers or inside with the DSP filter on board and daisy chain the whole thing together with a digital signal.

Although, there will always be those that like to have their amplification separate and easily changeable, say a 300B for a SS class A.     

 

Edit, seems the cost of DSP is coming down while premium passive parts are going up 

Edited February 21, 2016 by Guest

[thermonicavenger]

To both Dave & Matt

You are both right. Capacitors in general do horrible things to the audio signal. The biggest advance with my passive XO's was eliminating caps from the mid. & or bass/mid This explains the whole boutique cap phenomena. They (the best ones) simply minimise the harm they inflict on the sound. There is a point of diminishing return.

Example I was talking to Edward @ Adelaide Speakers who got comissioned to build his top line speaker with the "best" of everything Scanspeak drivers & $2.5K+ of Deulund XO components. The sound was VERY good BUT considering the hype surronding those components ultimately a bit of a let down. The hype creates an unrealistic expectation that the product can somehow transcend the limitations imposed by the laws of physics. The guy would have been better off going active for that outlay. I was talking with someone on these forums. He was selling a high end XO and ceramic driver set up with ribbons. That setup was replaced with a Vovox field coil driven by 845 triodes. He seemed to be more satisfied with that setup. Horses for courses. I want the mini DSP /XO for convenience. Ease of implementation. And for me simplicity as my entire XO toolkit is in one box and infinitely variable as opposed to analog active XO's. To me THAT is progress. But as the examples above indicate that is not for everyone.

[Sub Sonic]

  On 22/02/2016 at 1:04 AM, thermonicavenger said:

I want the mini DSP /XO for convenience. Ease of implementation. And for me simplicity as my entire XO toolkit is in one box and infinitely variable as opposed to analog active XO's. To me THAT is progress. But as the examples above indicate that is not for everyone.

Just having a play with the Mini DSP, it is definitely user friendly, versatile and great fun to play with. And that is coming from someone who is not particularly adept with computers.

Regards,

SS

[Guest]

Has anyone ever used/discussed the "power unity" theory, phase correction and time alignment with passive components in conjunction with the use of digital filtering ?

Personally see a number of benefits with regard to this 

Sorry slightly off topic, but a direct appication of this theory means less "actual power" used by the amps because the load seen by the amplifier is more like a resistor than a pure inductor + phase correction in real time. All for the betterment of high efficiency speakers.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Guest

[Guest]

  On 22/02/2016 at 1:11 AM, Sub Sonic said:

Just having a play with the Mini DSP, it is definitely user friendly, versatile and great fun to play with. And that is coming from someone who is not particularly adept with computers.

Regards,

SS

well done you have joined the "club"

Regards

[DDT]

Cool topic -I also tend to find myself attracted to higher efficiency speakers.

My highest efficency speakers are a set of VAF DC-X gen1 and Old Wharfedale E-70s both 95db/w/m, i think.

 

I have a very wide taste in music but when I'm in HiFi listening mode I particularly enjoy live vocals and percussion the most so I'm a fan of a tight fast dynamic speaker.

Live music is usually via efficient but not-always-so-sophisticated-speakers that are EQed to the max anyway so perhaps it is easier to achieve this sound in the home with efficient speakers. 

 

Having said that if I'm not in HiFi listening mode the same speakers can sound annoying when trying to play background music with people talking in the room etc. In those cases I prefer listening to a flatter more compressed sound with less midrange presence.

 

 

 

I also saw some Interesting discussion in this thread regarding painting or coating of speaker cabinets affecting the sound. I'd be interested to know how much sound normally escapes via the cabinet itself and if it transmits like both S and P waves (to use an earthquake analogy). Also how much of the sound from inside the cabinet actually reflects off the rear baffle and back out through the driver itself? Would i be correct in assuming that a more efficient speaker with lighter cone be expected to be 'more transparent' in this regard?