| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» Aporia - Silbatone Acoustics speaker (108 posts, 6 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 4 of 6 (108 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Truth stretched out via Feastrex prism...  Goodbye Chris Witmer...  Audio Discussions  Forum     26  227229  01-21-2006
  »  New  Western Electric reproduces 0Hz + some literature…..  Re-set...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  38631  07-24-2006
  »  New  Learn to differentiate between Imaging and Soundstage...  Learn to differentiate between Imaging and Soundstage....  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     0  11022  03-07-2007
  »  New  Klangfilm: actual knowledge is better then fetish imagi..  Klangfilm Kl51...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     18  170355  03-15-2007
  »  New  The unintended consequences of binaural things in Hi-Fi..  Re: Binaural -- or what ever the case was......  Playback Listening  Forum     1  22155  08-04-2009
  »  New  Munich High End 2010..  The retarded open baffle...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     39  266632  05-16-2010
  »  New  The CES's 2011 horns..  Reviewers and table radios...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     21  128431  01-07-2011
  »  New  A Moscow setup with Horns/Lowther..  A new reiteration of the Moscow setup....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     33  252100  02-27-2011
  »  New  A new kid in the block: Sadurni Acoustics..  Axpona 2015...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     21  91897  08-22-2011
  »  New  Aries Cerat Contendo - the newest "fat" kid i..  Stavros Danos from Cyprus.......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  30082  09-08-2011
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 61
Post ID: 9534
Reply to: 9531
An article on Stereo and Phase
fiogf49gjkf0d
I once came across this article on Stereo and Phase by JM LeCleach. It has interesting considerations on the subject of imaging:

Instruments_Ungels.jpg

IdeaQuels sont les objectifs de la stéréophonie?
- reproduire l'évènement musical ou sonore
- recréer l'ambiance sonore de la session d'enregistrement
- restituer sans déformation la perspective sonore / relief sonore (direction, distance des instruments ...)
- respecter la dimension et la forme des instruments telle que vue par l'ingénieur du son

Même si l'élargissement et l'approfondissement de la scène sonore, provoqués par la réverbération est généralement perçue comme plaisante, car permettant de créer une illusion de l'ambiance du concert direct, on doit toutefois admettre qu'il s'agit d'un écart à la fidélité de l'enregistrement.

Les instruments de musique sont des sources sonores complexes
- ce ne sont pas des sources ponctuelles
- l'émission sonore se fait depuis différentes zones de l'instrument avec des contenus fréquentiels et des directivités différentes

L'image sonore tridimensionnelle
Selon Gordon Holt la capacité d'un système à fournir une image sonore correcte est à mettre en relation avec son aptitude à créer des sources virtuelles non confondues avec les enceintes acoustiques.


Unfortunately for most of you it's in french, but the slides have little text and even an online translation is acceptable.

Romy, if you think it's worth it, please upload it to your server because my account doesn't accept much traffic.

Please rightclick and download: http://www.goodsoundclub.com/pdf/phase.pdf

Cheers,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 62
Post ID: 9535
Reply to: 9533
Ok, it is the time…
fiogf49gjkf0d

Joe,

Funny that imaging has very little to do what I think you do not “get”. Apparently my run about imaging was the only thing you “got” but I brought the whole “imaging thig” only as one of the illustrations. It is kind of sad that the keyword “imaging” aroused in you the Pavlovian Reaction that you have “heard it before”. I do not know that HP use to tell in 80s, I am sure that then as much as in the 90s and now he was “working” for the commodity of simplistic public sale – what level of thinking might be expected from that? Anyhow, I think you probably need to get in touch with him – he will give you more exposure to Silbatone’s version of audio (I do not know certainly but I presume that they shre it with you) and a higher position in Google search.

 Joe Roberts wrote:
Interesting! The Manger specs are 150-30k so that is not a great improvement, but in the Aporia, the backwave characteristics become important. The Manger backwave is not optimal. If this invention is as flat out the back as out the front, that could be an improvement. Does he have any drivers?

And you think that this is the only problem with Manger?  And you feel that the “improvement” might be only in frequency range, is HP some kind of your brother? He does not have a driver. He proposed me to build on. I personally have no interest in it. If your Silbatone folks are interested then I might put them together but it might ruin your ability to have an orgasm from Silbatones…

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Joe Roberts
Posts 48
Joined on 01-12-2009

Post #: 63
Post ID: 9536
Reply to: 9535
HIStory / YOURstory
fiogf49gjkf0d

I do not know that HP use to tell in 80s


I know you don't, that's why I seriously suggest you check it out.

The logic "musical intention of composer/conductor"-->minute analysis of 3D representation of orchestra performance in view of assumed intentionality-->marriage of objective and aesthetic criteria-->Real Music/Absolute Sound--> orchestral as ultimate raison d'etre/test of audio--> highest level of cultural achievement and audio system design--> -crumbs for the little people who "aren't there yet"...and so forth.

Pappy HP spread it out in 1983. He was more sophisticated in the early days than you give him credit for, especially by your own measures of superiority and system teleology.

Unfortunately, the equipment at his disposal at the time sucked but Jadis and Infinity IRS were the best he could scrape up. Today, I'd like to think he would have horns and a good triode amp.

By the 90s, TAS was on welfare and outside financial interests were driving content. It was a wasteland.

Surely you will find points of divergence, given that this your specialization, but what I'm hearing you say sounds quite "School of Sea Cliff" to me.

People who studied both early HP and neo-Romy might have more to add.



Anyhow, I think you probably need to get in touch with him



No thanks. It is enough of a shock to my self-image that I find myself celebrating his work in print.

But I think YOU might be seriously interested in learning more about your intellectual forebears.


J Rob

PS--By the way, Romy the Cat is the benefactor in Google search on Silbatone. Try it.

Don't worry...I won't bill you. Glad to support the effort.

01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 64
Post ID: 9537
Reply to: 9536
HP the Cat?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Joe Roberts wrote:
I do not know that HP use to tell in 80s
I know you don't, that's why I seriously suggest you check it out.
Romy, are you not familiar with the early efforts of Harry Pearson? I lived through all of that of course. I hesitate to say it, but it is true. Most of what you are saying is exactly what HP said in his early writings, if you didn't know. He is like your evil twin, or perhaps you are his evil twin Big Smile .

Seriously, though, it would be very much worth your while to read his early stuff, from BEFORE TAS got bogged down by commercial endorsements, etc. You would find it fun. You don't need to be Ramanujan.

Adrian
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 65
Post ID: 9538
Reply to: 9534
Stereo imaging
fiogf49gjkf0d
 tuga wrote:
I once came across this article on Stereo and Phase by JM LeCleach. It has interesting considerations on the subject of imaging
Thanks tuga. It is a nice article, but my French is a little rusty. It seems that he does very little more than explain the limitations of stereo versus binaural reproduction.

From this came the schools of thought of quadrophonic reproduction and omnidirectional speakers, etc. of course. I, myself, just accept the limitations of mono and stereo recordings and do the best I can.

Is there some more nuance I missed (owing to my poor French)? If so, I would appreciate a summary of your thoughts on how this can impact our audio systems.

Adrian
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 66
Post ID: 9539
Reply to: 9537
Imposable to sell.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 drdna wrote:

Romy, are you not familiar with the early efforts of Harry Pearson? I lived through all of that of course. I hesitate to say it, but it is true. Most of what you are saying is exactly what HP said in his early writings, if you didn't know. He is like your evil twin, or perhaps you are his evil twin .

Seriously, though, it would be very much worth your while to read his early stuff, from BEFORE TAS got bogged down by commercial endorsements, etc. You would find it fun. You don't need to be Ramanujan.

Nope, I never know anything about him before mid 90s and frankly speaking considering what I read from him in mid-end 90s, from what my friends told me about him, and from the comment of some people who visited him I never expressed any interest in Harry Pearson. In fact, I was in second part of 90s affected by one Harry Pearson development when he told about the cutting-edge home theaters installations. What I built mine and spent considerable amount efforts to figured out how it works I realized where Mr. Pearson fails in his analysis. Ironically (if to keep the sinister part of the deal aside) he slips at the very same black-ice as Joe does. Joe still does not “get” that a playback do not impersonate the imaging of original performance event but rather create the imaging of reproductive intentions where the system arranger and certain elements of playback act as interpretive forces of relation between a listener and the performance/composition.  I do not know what Harry Pearson advocated in 80s but I know that it was not “it” as this thing is imposable to sell. Anyhow, I doubt that I would be interested to found the TAS from 80s. The right answer are available without any proxies and without anybody’s desire to sell them. I also have no personal interest in Harry’s sinking/writing.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 67
Post ID: 9540
Reply to: 9539
It's all semantics...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
Joe still does not “get” that a playback do not impersonate the imaging of original performance event but rather create the imaging of reproductive intentions where the system arranger and certain elements of playback act as interpretive forces of relation between a listener and the performance/composition.
Yes, but it is kind of implied, since the stereo can NEVER replicate the original event; 99% of the information is lost. Maybe I give people the benefit of the doubt, but I think when they say the goal of stereo is to replicate the original event, they do not really mean it; they are talking about the communication of intent and the presence of intellectual, emotional, and spiritual aspects of the Sound.

 Romy the Cat wrote:
I do not know what Harry Pearson advocated in 80s but I know that it was not “it” as this thing is imposable to sell.
Yes, that is EXACTLY why as TAS grew from the 80's to the 90's, it changed drastically to a very commercial venture and a very different perspective. (I miss the staples. I miss the "little pocketbooks.") I still think it would be fun.

Adrian
01-25-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Joe Roberts
Posts 48
Joined on 01-12-2009

Post #: 68
Post ID: 9541
Reply to: 9540
I have three cats to feed myself...
fiogf49gjkf0d


Joe still does not "get" that a playback do not impersonate the imaging of original performance event but rather create the imaging of reproductive intentions where the system arranger and certain elements of playback act as interpretive forces of relation between a listener and the performance/composition.


Yo Romy, I said as much in several of my 200 posts above.

You would be amazed at what I "get." You would also be amazed how well I can pick apart audio discussions and formal evaluation frameworks. This was my anthropological specialty for 20 years.

When I say I'm not getting anything radically new, this doesn't mean the discussion is worthless, only that it is not new.

What is missing in this quoted sentence that you advocated earlier is the composer/conductor intention. If it is just you the listener, dicking around with your stereo in a way that tickles your chin, you're starting to sound a lot like me. That is precisely my philosophy...but you are welcome to join in.

Call it "reproductive intentions" or "interpretive interaction" if you like. That is a useful way to put it.

Also, just because I write some marketing text as a special favor to one of my best friends, you act like I'm Sam Tellig.

Come on, let some hifi bums like me and Harry Pearson make a few shekels. Most of the work I did in audio was for free or even cost me money.

J Rob
02-06-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 69
Post ID: 9648
Reply to: 9376
Some summation….
fiogf49gjkf0d

To summarize the thread, at least what is important - not the Robert’s cheap clownship, I have to admit that I spoke with a number of people, the people who are NOT the “exuberant morons” in my view, who went to CES and heard Silbatone Aporia.  The feedback was from negative to a pure surprise why I even ask about them. Inspire that on the web the industry cheerleaders are trying to trumpet an idiotic kitsch about Aporia and stuffed up sites with cheerful comments but reportedly it has absolutely nothing to with realty. Well how different it from any other audio products that were stupidly drummed up after Hi-Fi shows?

I have to admit that it is not a good idea to judge a loudspeaker based upon somebody else’s comment but I do not judge the loudspeaker but I rather question the gravity of Silbatone intentions that were stuffed into the Aporia.  If the level of Silbatone folks’ interests is similar to the Joe Roberts’ interest then the entire Silbatone product line is unfortunately suitable only for sound reinforcements in Dunkin Donalds. I would be careful with guessing and I have no need to guess but there was 3 contractive and important points dropped in this thread:

1)      An ability to damp or QA the wave-propagation  drivers with pressure reflections

2)      Existence of wave-propagation design concept that has no problem typical for Manger designs with their fjordian wave extinguishing

3)      Disability of the  marketing pumpers of audio industry to sell the idea of a single-driver speakers to anybody who has audio IQ higher then the “targeted  audiophile average”

With all this said, I think the thread turned out to be educational and indicative for a reader who migh have the  Dark Mater between his/her ears.

Rgs, The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Joe Roberts
Posts 48
Joined on 01-12-2009

Post #: 70
Post ID: 9673
Reply to: 9648
I am serious cat...
fiogf49gjkf0d

I have to admit that it is not a good idea to judge a loudspeaker based upon somebody else’s comment


Yet you continue to do it again and again... why?

You know its bogus, I know its bogus, they know it is bogus. Dude, it is BOGUS. Just say no! Stop!

I must point out that there is a serious problem with your "ask a friend" data collection method. It is obvious that what you are looking for is not an impartial assessment of the Aporia, but rather validation and ammunition for the kind of psychotic babble found in the post above.

I can imagine how the question was phrased: "When you were at CES, did you hear that ridiculous APORIA single driver horn that that washed-up, ho-bag Joe Roberts is hawking these days...you know the one that all the exuberant morons are crowing about?"

Hell, if you called me for this sort of crazed , I'd probably humor you too...just to get you off the phone.

You can project, imagine, and speculate all you want but the fact remains that you didn't hear the speaker and you therefore don't actually know what you are talking about. You are the one who has nothing to do with reality.

Calling people on the phone who may have heard the Aporia, if in fact you did this, will not bring you any closer to the promised land. You are out in the hot desert, pulling around a Lamm amp in a cart over the sandy dunes, and the vision of a cool glass of water doesn't make your tongue any wetter.

This is not to say that everybody who heard the Aporia loved it...that would be unlikely regardless of how it sounded. But, at least they heard it and can discuss the issue with some authority.  I can say that by and large the speaker was very well received and many people liked it quite a bit, including numerous competing manufacturers and various distributors who were impressed enough to take on the product line.

The Executive Director of the Las Vegas Symphony hung around for a half hour listening to music and was quite impressed. He was anything but a high-end zombie...in fact, he knew almost zero about high-end audio, but I dare say he knows music. I have his card on my desk in front of me. To me, that experience counts more than praise from a dozen "internet audiophiles" precisely because I know he was reacting without well-baked preconceptions.

Also, I would remind the readers what they already know, that "serious" does not mean "unthinkingly agrees with Romy.™"

There is another term for that condition and I'll let you all define what it is!

Now think about this...many of the "exuberant morons" who are interesed in the concept of Aporia most likely would be more or less equally exuberant about the Romy approach. Some guys are intrigued by more than one approach. Does this mean that they are still morons or does this save them from the death squad?
 
How about the exuberant morons who decide that Romy Approach™ is going to be what they are exuberant about? Face it, there are some out there...maybe you just talked them into it with persistent rhetoric and that special brand of manic enthusiasm... they never heard the results, but they are exuberant. Are they still morons or rather a special class of highly evolved creatures?

I maintain that the Aporia speaker does not sound like anything else, at least nothing I have heard. It may or may not be what a given individual is searching for, but it is not a predictable sounding speaker.

I say the healthy and sensible approach is to stay open and listen because there are still surprises out there if you allow it.

Joe Rob



02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 71
Post ID: 9674
Reply to: 9538
Point source
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hello Adrian,

I added this paper as an interesting read for our discussion of "the point-source" and I think that the pictures are clear and informative enough on that subject.
There's also there's mentioning of several aspects of speaker design (like imaging, time and phase distortion, etc.) that match Romy's views on the subject and have been put to practice in the Macondo.

Best,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 72
Post ID: 9675
Reply to: 9673
Nope you are not a serious cat...
fiogf49gjkf0d

Joe, it you willing to quote me then quote my entire thought but not the out of context taken sound-bites that make you demagogy sealable. I am sorry to say it but you are in uncharted water and you are out of depth.  I am not sure why you are still going, if the keel deep into a dune and the propellers are still spinning then it create nothing but bubbles. Well, creations of bubbles is you specialty and as you said, some dealer and distributors on the deck might smell the stench of burned oil and noise of heavy cavitations  and might bite. I am glad that I was instrumental, and I do not mind. Make sure that the dealer/distributors you pick would not the friends of mine as it would be too ironic to hear from one more time their typical comment: “…the product is crap but thankfully the customers are idiots. BTW, Romy lay off to bitch about this at you site, I have a mortgage to pay.”

Anyway, Joe, I think you need to find another vent to beam your “audio seriousness” to others, from what you have impressed in this thread I am not impressed, moreover, very disappointed. There are plenty audio comminutes who would gladly adapt you, kiss you ass, feed you with the stores that you would like to hear and who help you to demonize the people who consider your view as too light. I too much know all those games to have any inters in them. I am sure that you soon will find your Silbatone Aporia US representative who will take your torch of “schizophrenic hi-fi” and you will shut up until you see a new opportunity to express that psychotic babble of audio practicing.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 73
Post ID: 9676
Reply to: 9674
More about Point Source
fiogf49gjkf0d

Tuga,

It is very much NOT about the Point Source. The Point Source is absolutely irrelevant label that was invented by the single driver enthusiasts in order to mentally differentiate their speakers from multi-drivers configuration and in order to justify why some people are not able to integrated multi-drivers. It is like a ship going across an ocean and leaves a water mark behind: one person can design a ship to hit zillion important operational parameters of the ship and another person who is clues about the whole about ship building would design a ship to leave specific water mark. There is no need to ask this person how fast the ship might go, what would be displacement, draft, length, ability break to ice, What would be propulsion system, what would be fuel, people or cargo capacity. Those people will see only that the ship leave the watermarks in the shape of Mogein Dovid and they are ambivalent and immuned to understand anything else.

I think the concept of Point Source itself, as it is being use by single-driver people shell not be used and very many single-driver designs are not proper Point Source. I might endorse the Point Source concept but only form a perspective of actual true mining of the term. Back in my photography time there was a devise: optical bench and one of the attributes of this devise was an optical system the set up the calibration target at infinite distance. Not the 100 times of focal distance of a measured lens but in true infinity (think bout a very powerful inverted binocular). In this setting the dimensions of target have no width and it is just a dot in space. This characteristic is important for some optical measurements. BTW, I was a semi-inventor of a very interesting devise for silver photography that took advantage of many benefits of “Single Point Light Source” in enlargers – it worked very very well, anyhow it is a history… So, why I bring it all up?  Because in my vocabulary I do use the Point Source concept but it has absolutely different meaning then what single-driver people trying to use. When you have a stereo installation and you play (proper) mono material then you playback present sound radiated from a single point directly between the loudspeakers. This is all know and simple BUT the absolute dimensions of this monophonic single point, an ability of the single point to maintain own  minimum dimensions at the stress of different dynamic and frequency ranges and the most important – the mechanisms of evaluating of the single point dimensions is totally different subject and I treat THIS subject with high respect. Generally the smallest single point Sound would be able to collapse itself on mono the better imaging you will have in stereo, but it is not all so simple and there is LOT more to it. Anyhow, that is the definition of Point Source that exists in my vocabulary. The way how the single-driver audio people use terms Point Source ordinary is just the way how they were sold to use the phrase by the stupid audio propaganda and they juts repeat it brainlessly like monkeys.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 74
Post ID: 9677
Reply to: 9676
EcruoS tnioP
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,

You got it all backwards but thanks for your visual approach to the subject.
I really meant to illustrate the fact that Point Source does not exist in "real life" and that it's analogy with a single driver makes no sense (then there is the question of live vs. recorded-and-then-reproduced sound and live sound being different things...).
The above (JMLC) paper is, in my view, a very good illustration of that, and has information on the subject integration of multiple driver systems.

Best,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 75
Post ID: 9678
Reply to: 9677
The kindergarten audio?
fiogf49gjkf0d
Tuga,

I do not know what JMLC had written in that paper – I can’t read French but from looking at the pictures I might only presume that he was trying to prove or disprove the Point Source idea by looking at the souses live sound vs. recorded-and-then-reproduced sound. You do not to be overly observant to recognize that Point Source does not exist in realty BUT I do not think that is prove anything in audio. The live vs. recorded-and-then-reproduced sound are the same things from the perspective of perception and different things from the perspective of methods. It is like playing a note on violin and piano – it might be the same pitch and the same note but very different techniques and methods are involved. In one of the articles on my Audio For Dummies ™ section I have proposed that we shall not position speakers but shall create Sound in room. A single-driver (wave-propulsion type) has very poor room coupling and practically no variables to tune itself. It is like somebody built for you a guitar but it has not Machine heads and string “as is”. What are you doing to do with it? Be advised that a Silbatone-like back-loaded single-driver (even if to embrace the wrong perception of Point Source as the single-driver people perceive it) is not a Point Source. A Moron sits in front of large single-driver transducer, hear HF radiating from the driver’s pancake and feel that it is a “Point Source”. I am sorry but it is laughable even from the context of the kindergarten audio… JMLC is too audio intelligent person to argue Point Source or not the Point Source. Audio have a lot of own Bermuda Triangles and I do not see a need to fight with surrogate notions of Point Source that I see as nothing else but a artificial foolishness conceived by simplistic and semi-sinister people.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 76
Post ID: 9679
Reply to: 9674
Modern speaker design
fiogf49gjkf0d
 drdna wrote:
Thanks tuga. It is a nice article, but my French is a little rusty. It seems that he does very little more than explain the limitations of stereo versus binaural reproduction.

From this came the schools of thought of quadrophonic reproduction and omnidirectional speakers, etc. of course. I, myself, just accept the limitations of mono and stereo recordings and do the best I can.

Is there some more nuance I missed (owing to my poor French)? If so, I would appreciate a summary of your thoughts on how this can impact our audio systems.

Adrian


 tuga wrote:
Hello Adrian,

I added this paper as an interesting read for our discussion of "the point-source" and I think that the pictures are clear and informative enough on that subject.
There's also there's mentioning of several aspects of speaker design (like imaging, time and phase distortion, etc.) that match Romy's views on the subject and have been put to practice in the Macondo.

Best,
Tuga
I see. Well, I think we have to assume that anyone who is manufacturing a speaker is very aware of these fundamentals of acoustics and audio reproduction. I think the question we have to ask in any speaker design is WHY they are making the trade offs that they do. I think the biggest problem is that speakers are manufactured to meet a specific price point. Simple DIY'rs who make there own plans make constructions without recognizing that these compromises have been made; hence there is a bit of hubris when we "discover" the importance of time-alignment etc.

Adrian
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 77
Post ID: 9680
Reply to: 9677
Reality of point source
fiogf49gjkf0d
 tuga wrote:
I really meant to illustrate the fact that Point Source does not exist in "real life" and that it's analogy with a single driver makes no sense (then there is the question of live vs. recorded-and-then-reproduced sound and live sound being different things...)
Exactly. There is absolutely no question that reproduced music and live creation of sounds are totally different. They are totally physically different mechanisms. Reproduced sound is limited only to the small portion of the event that a microphone recorded.

However, the concept of the point source is absolutely valid. The audio reproduction should follow the transduction from the microphone, which is point source. We have to "play by the rules we make."

It is a trade-off of course, and no point source is perfect, but that is a different argument.

MORE INTERESTING, turn it around and make recordings based on how the speakers exist. Have on each side a microphone down low near the ground to record bass notes, another one up higher to record high notes only, and mix them into a stereo version. THEN, when you have your playback, the audio more closely reflects the original event: a "multi-point source" recording. This is really the way to do it, but for some reason nobody records this way, even though nearly all stereo systems are built in a very similar configuration.

Adrian
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Joe Roberts
Posts 48
Joined on 01-12-2009

Post #: 78
Post ID: 9681
Reply to: 9680
Point/no point
fiogf49gjkf0d


First off, I will point out that neither Silbatone nor I claim or agree that the Aporia horn is a point source, because clearly it is not. The sound comes from two "areas" but even that is not a particularly useful notion.

Although some do make that claim and I may have alluded to it in the deep past, I would argue that the notion of point source is not the important thing about single driver speakers. Once the sound is excited beyond the surface of the driver, it is no longer a "point" in any way, but rather occupies a 3-D solid shape whose included angles vary as a function of frequency. This is the point of Jean-Michel's paper, earlier raised in the writings of G.A. Briggs in the 1960s.

Furthermore, in a world of walls and reflections, sound does not reach us from a "point" and when there are two speakers in stereo, the relevance of the point source argument further evaporates into a world of complexity.

Nor are microphones usefully considered as point sources (or point receptors) because in stereo recording and even mixdowns to mono, arrays of microphones are typically employed. They are variously directional in a frequency dependent way also. Simplification of the model to "point source" denies the inherent complexity.

As I argued above, the potential advantage presented by single driver speakers is that the sound comes from a single source. This advantage rests in the that problems with matching different types and configurations of drivers and horns or whatever are sidestepped. It is hard to get a compression midrange to mate with a direct radiator cone woofer for example.

The brain can blend different sound sources of different character to some degree, but I find that this can be hard work and subliminally fatiguing or unnatural. Depends on the specific implementation in question. This can be made to work.

Single drivers, especially in back horns, are not immune from frequency related differences in character. Many Lowther-type systems vomit out bass that is not "like" the midrange, perhaps due to distortions in the horn and problems of vibrating horn cabinets.

Where Le'Cleach's paper takes me in this discussion is that single drivers can more accurately capture the narrowing angular dispersion of sound with rising frequency compared with certain horns whose design is such as to engineer wide dispersion into the design. This concern in horn design comes from sound reinforcement considerations.

Ideally, a multi-horn system would include the notion of narrowing radiation into its execution, but the problem is complicated by the fact that various instruments present different patterns of dispersion narrowing--it is not purely a function of frequency. This is discussed in Briggs.

That said, the narrowing dispersion of a single driver can perceptually be too sharp, as as to strike the ear as unnatural. This is why, in my reading,  Silbatone put a diffusor on that Manger driver.

Here again I would argue that the ear is the best judge of a successful implementation. If something sounds markedly unnatural, it is bad. If it strikes the ear as natural, it is good--or good enough.

Theory and speculation, even with a stack of physics books on the shelf, only gets you so far. Direct listening experience is key. That is a very serious argument in my book.

02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 499
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 79
Post ID: 9683
Reply to: 9681
The goal of multi driver matching
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Joe Roberts wrote:
I would argue that the notion of point source is not the important thing about single driver speakers.
But we have all heard the difference, with standard stereo installations, where the bass comes from down below and the highs come from up above. Our ears can resolve sound localization in three dimensions. Point source installations have a distinct character.

 Joe Roberts wrote:
Ideally, a multi-horn system would include the notion of narrowing radiation into its execution, but the problem is complicated by the fact that various instruments present different patterns of dispersion narrowing--it is not purely a function of frequency.
Would it then be better to optimize the drivers to be dissimilar from one another: to match the radiation patterns of instruments traditionally used within each frequency range the drivers cover?

Adrian
02-09-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,623
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 80
Post ID: 9684
Reply to: 9680
Is the concept of the point source absolutely valid?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 drdna wrote:
However, the concept of the point source is absolutely valid. The audio reproduction should follow the transduction from the microphone, which is point source. We have to "play by the rules we make."
Well, let look into it. When we use a term “point source” we use geometrical logic or the logic that space (would it be 2 or 3 dimensional spaces) is equality spreads on all directions. However, does it? We can view propagation of Space only in context of a given coordinate system, if you use classical geometry then you are right: Space equally-dimensional and point source is a single dot in space. However, in audio the coordinate system is not geometry but hearing and human hearing is not equally-dimensional. Humans, juts because the position of ears on heard have much higher sensitivity to horizontal sound source hen to vertical sound source. I do not remember now the equal loudness numbers but roughly is I am not mistaken for horizontally-located head sensitivity in horizontal plane of 1 degree is similar to 5 degree in vertical plane. (Due to the lower bias for receptors) what does it mean? It means that if we are taking about point source for human hearing we are talking not about point but about vertically located 5 points. So, let “play by the rules” we have. There is not such a sing as point source but there an array of point sources…

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 4 of 6 (108 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Truth stretched out via Feastrex prism...  Goodbye Chris Witmer...  Audio Discussions  Forum     26  227229  01-21-2006
  »  New  Western Electric reproduces 0Hz + some literature…..  Re-set...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  38631  07-24-2006
  »  New  Learn to differentiate between Imaging and Soundstage...  Learn to differentiate between Imaging and Soundstage....  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     0  11022  03-07-2007
  »  New  Klangfilm: actual knowledge is better then fetish imagi..  Klangfilm Kl51...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     18  170355  03-15-2007
  »  New  The unintended consequences of binaural things in Hi-Fi..  Re: Binaural -- or what ever the case was......  Playback Listening  Forum     1  22155  08-04-2009
  »  New  Munich High End 2010..  The retarded open baffle...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     39  266632  05-16-2010
  »  New  The CES's 2011 horns..  Reviewers and table radios...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     21  128431  01-07-2011
  »  New  A Moscow setup with Horns/Lowther..  A new reiteration of the Moscow setup....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     33  252100  02-27-2011
  »  New  A new kid in the block: Sadurni Acoustics..  Axpona 2015...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     21  91897  08-22-2011
  »  New  Aries Cerat Contendo - the newest "fat" kid i..  Stavros Danos from Cyprus.......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  30082  09-08-2011
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts