drdna wrote:

Fundamentally I think the injection channel and layered sound are different things.  The injection channel is designed simply to compensate for the timbral shortcomings of a particular driver.  However, because of lobing effects, etc. it is never this simple.  There will be overlap into the realm of the Layered Sound effect, which is intended to mix directional sound with omnidirectional sound.

Although I do agree that the “layered Sound” and my Injection are different things I do not agree with your characterization of my Injection. My Injection Channel is not juts designed to compensate for the timbral shortcomings of a particular driver.  The timbral coloration is a noble thing itself but my injection does more. My Injection does not just add colors but it adds colors along with some very interesting Texture. The works Texture is overly used by me lately but it is what it is. With activation of Injection channel the main line of sound begin to be filed with multi-colorful dots and the most interesting in my Injection is not the injection of colors but the Injection of the Dots that creates that “Doty Texture”. The key is the density of those dots and allocation of the colors along with the dense sarea of the dots. Here is where Tannoy Red from my point of view rules unchallenged. The Red are very colored speakers with a lot of phase problems and with a lot of problems of continuity of tone. The Reds almost digitalize sound converting a neutral reference “gray” tone into the… multi-colored multi-bits. Now, we take that fountain of overly-colored dots and overlay it with properly-continuing sound of main speaker. What happens – the Red’s colors do eject itself into total result but the second most imports thing is that the Colorful Dots somehow intermingle with the continuing presentation of Macondo, injecting the well-measured and well-moderated amount of Very Positive Texture.

Sure, I can run my mouth about benefit of my Injection in any direction – it is Internet and the words cost nothing. The only tangible and honorable thing in all of it is obtaining and predictable demonstration of Result. Here is an interesting fact. I did demonstrate to a number of people the effect of my Injection, running Macondo without Injection and then adding it. The first reaction that people have was not the “extension of timbral reaches” but increasing of the system’s micro-dynamics and adding finer texture to presentation. There are many other moments but they would demand too look deeper and unless a person is sitting in front of a playback with properly implemented Injection Channel it would be too much trying to explain the deeper view.

drdna wrote:

Layered Sound attempts to create semi-unidirectional sound to accomodate this.  But without time alignment, etc., really it is just an approximation of infinite reflections in a theoretical acoustic space with infinitely variable surfaces.

I do not see any rational in the “unidirectional” approach that Layered Sound is trying to punch. They might have good Sound for whatever reasons  but I do not think that their Sound has anything to do with unidirectivery.

drdna wrote:

Most hall reflection sounds will be lower frequencies of variable localizability.  To approximate this simply, we might try to hook up a mid-woofer speaker in an out-of-phase configuration.  The exact cutoff frequency and loudness amplitude will remain to be determined.  For most of us using high efficiency horns, hooking up a low efficiency dynamic woofer speaker may be sufficient as it will be many dB down.  This also helps to explain why many designs with side or back firing woofers have reasonable sound.  Simply because it creates a simulation of hall ambience we associate with live music. People using a multi-speaker woofer array may simply consider switching one driver on one side out of phase. So, I wonder if hooking up a second set of woofers at very low amplitude out of phase in conjunction with the existing directional system may add an element of simulated hall ambience that makes the overall experience more like live music. I would be very interested to see what other people think if they give it a try.

This is completely different direction. You do not talk anymore nether about Colors Injection nor about the Texture Injection but about the Imaging Injection. I spent LOT of time to experiment with Imaging Injection. The Imaging Injection is very interesting subject but it is absolutely different subject all together. BTW, I generally never was successful with Imaging Injection.

Not will everyone “get” it, or would agree with it but… where did you see me to care….

Q: What is the worst aspect of sound reproduction?

A: Excessive HF response of playback. A flat response above 5-6kHz is indication of dynamic and transient deficiency of playback.

So, what it has to do with Injection Channel?  Well, when I properly setup Macondo Injection then I might slightly roll-off the HF knee of my MF channel for 1.5-2dB (of combined output) and it does have no negative (means positive in my book) impact to listening awareness.

Paul S wrote:

I wanted to add that I have found that the effects I just mentioned occur even when the sound is EQ'd to "compensate".  Setting aside the other issues raised by EQ, the notes in the EQ'd spectrum still "develop" with the upward tilt, where each "splash" of the skipping rock also tends upward, as well, etc.  Likewise, no EQ I know of does anything to help foster a "realistic" "texture", which is probably a kind of transient...

drdna wrote:

This is why the discussion of the Injection channel and the use of the loudspeaker like a resonant musical instrument is so apt.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Indeed, I did not realized that I shifted my thinking in this thread and an in my general views from the ways of using those “Resonating Oops” to the subject of Injection principles. I think I did it because Injection, as I use it, and the “Resonating Oops” benefits served the very same propose, in fact I “discover” Injection because I was trying to imitate the “Resonating Oops” (this thread is a good dairy how it happened). Loudspeakers are always a musical instrument but even in musical instruments it is always a question what produces more portion of  sound – the fundamental of a vibrating string or the resonance and after-tones of the instrument’s deck. I wish I have skills to control the natural “Resonating Oops” – I do not have them, nether I have in Macondo tools and means to do so. The Injection, I feel, is a good substitute where the Resonating Oops’ benefits are delivered in a predetermined and well managed format.

There is a speaker maker in Russia, Moscow – Alexander Kniysev who just introduced his own take on “Resonance Oops”. What he does is not my cap of tea and I see a number of issues with his design that I would object but it is not my speaker. Nevertheless what Alexander does with this implementation and how he thinks about it I feel is very worthy attention. Watch out the lazy Feastrex people – this is what you should be doing. Here are some free translations of the comments Alexander made in responses to my questions.

“Those panels are rather an outcome of my intuition about sound then a design based upon formal acoustic principles.”

“The system implies harmonic integrations between driver and panel “

“In my view the panel influences sound much more then driver, I generally consider that if an audio acoustic system speaks only via a driver then it is a mistaken acoustic system.”

Certainly Mr. Kniysev’s way to implement the “Resonance Oops” and my ways are very different but it is what it is and I think Alexander’s attempt is educational.  The Alexander speaker has 96dB sensitivity and employs  in-house made dual-concentric alnico driver with both paper cones and leather suspension.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Not will everyone “get” it, or would agree with it but… where did you see me to care…. Q: What is the worst aspect of sound reproduction? A: Excessive HF response of playback. A flat response above 5-6kHz is indication of dynamic and transient deficiency of playback. So, what it has to do with Injection Channel?  Well, when I properly setup Macondo Injection then I might slightly roll-off the HF knee of my MF channel for 1.5-2dB (of combined output) and it does have no negative (means positive in my book) impact to listening awareness. Rgs, Romy the Cat

Andy Simpson wrote:

Regarding your position on the 'flatness of reproduction', as described above, do you think that this could be a response to distortion in recordings? Does your system run such a 'roll-off'? If so, do you have the facility to run the system flat?

I very much understand your point and well-understand what you did not say. I still stick to what I proposed above but there is so much more to it.  I feel that it is incredibly interesting subject and is way beyond current thread. If you wish the might formulate the theme and start another thread.

Interesting article here about fungus-treated wood used to make a violin that "out-performed" a Strad...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090914111418.htm

In the context of this thread: It might be ineteresting (if less glamorous) to apply this technology to a mid-range speaker cabinet designed to resonate.

In the context of humanity: The world could definitely use a lot more guys like Francis Schwarz!

jd*

serenechaos wrote:

Romy, Any thoughts yet as to Injection Channel location/integration in new room?  Selfish question, I recently got a pair of reds, and have been trying to think of how to place them/type of enclosure to build,  without disturbing image, or too much diffraction (hidden behind mouth of mid-bass horn).   And if height offsets image, a time aligned rotation to the sides might be even more noticeable? (Or not, haven't tried, sometimes things sound different than I expect...)

Yesterday a guy come me from Atlanta to “see” my new installation.  I kind of explained that I am not in “demo mode” now but he still came to “see it”. I have no idea what he wanted to “see” and I was kind of obligated to play something to him. I had only one channel, but still not properly finally tined and not aligned. When I listen it I know what I want to her and I can make mental corrections and extrapolations as I know what is not done yet. He of course is not able to do it, so he has no ability to understand what I was trying to show off with the sound.

Anyhow, the Macondo in my view did not sound properly at all. We were listening just left channel sonly (only one midbass is connected), I played some oldies from 20 and 30s. He looked like he liked it – I have no idea what he was listening... It is not the point. The point is that in the end of the listening he asked about the Injection Channel and I decided to demonstrate it’s effectiveness. So, I did what I usually do – let to listen and then to plug in and out the Injection Channel.  It is interesting that I was forced to crank the Injection Channel up to -4dB in order the Atlanta guy to hear any difference.  What he did not know was that last weekend a friend of my stopped by to help me to put the Injection Channel above the Macondo… in absolutely random position. There was no alignment of Injection Channel’s tweeter to the Macondo’s tweeter done. So, the Injection Channel at -4dB was not as effective as it was in aligned position at -12dB. When the Atlanta left I give some listening and tuning to Injection Channel and I concluded that if the Injection Channel is not properly setup then it MUST NOT BE USED.

So, as ridicules as Injection Channel is , the Injection Channel is VERY powerful tool ONLY if it properly setup and properly used, otherwise it is just a waste. I know that are some folk out there who are trying to implement Injection Channels for themselves, make a mental note for yourself: if there is a super premise time aliment and frequency/amplitude dialing in then the Injection idea will not work.