17 of 23 speakers in my studio and home theater systems are internally powered. My studio system is all Genelec and sounds very accurate. I know the best new concert and studio speakers are internally powered there are great technical reasons to design a speaker and an amp synergistically, this concept is much more important to sound quality than the vibration systems we often buy. How can an audiophile justify a vibration system of any sort with this in mind.
RE: the Atmos "experience" you can’t blame the speakers, the content, or the mix. If your experience sucks you can change it, now, easily.
I use "technology" to change a meh Atmos experience.
Speaker setup with dolby specs, auro-3d specs, or DTS-X specs? check.
Room measurements optimized with acoustic treatments and dsp? Check
Appropriate "upmixer" selected based on the content? Check and double check.
( If your upmixers are sub par check out Auro-3D, Dolby Surround, DTS-Neural X, Sony 360, THX Spatial Audio or legacy upmixers like Audyssey DSX and DTS-Neo-X. If you want more upmix profiles to choose from check out a Yamaha, or Onkyo products which have proprietary codecs. The Logic 16 upmixer from JBL and Arcam products is supposed to be wicked but I haven't tried))
For those of you who are "imagining" what it will be like one day to have an atmos system check out the other threads on atmos here. Or I guess you can keep making stuff up as you go along if you have nothing else to do 🙄
@thespeakerdude, in order to pass a "test" you would need to actually have a stereo. If you want advice about what to buy, please start a build thread. If not, please stop bothering people who actually own gear with your opinions which for all any one can tell, are just made up, cut and paste, from various websites.
You are stepping into an area that borders on fiction. You have NO system any one is aware of, no creds, and now "we"? Is we invisible too? Post a link to your think tank.
ATMOS provides a rough definition for the dispersion pattern of speakers
Really? You actually have an Atmos system that isn't invisible??? Details? Is this something you read about too? LOL.
eventually the appropriate algorithms to maximize the "experience".
When you have some pics to post of your atmos system you will actually have an experience, it should be better than a chatroom I hope.
It is one area where we think the ATMOS standard / specification is insufficient and lacks the framework for future extensibility, tuning, and features.
ATMOS provides a rough definition for the dispersion pattern of speakers depending on where used, but it is fixed, without consideration of actual pattern, cutoff, dispersion versus frequency, etc. For an extensible object oriented speaker system, there should be much better ability to define the speakers and eventually the appropriate algorithms to maximize the "experience". Though ATMOS is object based, those objects are assumed to be fixed in terms of what they are with a fluffy definition.
Paradigm and Anthem are the perfect example of a company that should really make speakers and amps and crossovers made for each other.
I didn't realize you were driving your surrounds with Anthem. I already own many of the Paradigm/Anthem active speakers and of course agree that they are made for each other. I don't think it matters if you use gen 1 or 2 in a surround system. Maybe a fun comparison to run your mains in 2 channel stereo mode and swap the solid state Anthem out with the BHK tube amp and compare the differences.
I spent the first 10 years buried in engineering and didn’t get to hob knob with celebrities like some have on this topic :-) ... just a bit envious, though I have been star struck a few times since but back to the topic at hand.
If you don’t mind your amplifier and speaker adding something to the music that was not there in the recording, then by all means go with the Pass amp and passive speakers. You have to like what you are hearing. If you want a improved level of accuracy, then you need to get rid of the passive crossover. If you want the absolute lowest distortion possible in a given form factor, then you will need to ditch the Pass amplifier as that requires a tight integration of amplifier, driver, enclosure and more than a "hint" of advanced signal processing. If you want a single speaker that can adapt to your environment, your mood, or your music, more than just simple equalization and time alignment, than that is going to require an active speaker and that is what you will start to see more of. Active speakers are in their infancy.
Where it is going to get complicated is "deciding" where an active speaker ends, and where a room correction system begins.
@kota1 I think I have 2 of these units to run my surround sound Paradigm Bs and 2x channels on my Paradigm CC. Paradigm and Anthem are the perfect example of a company that should really make speakers and amps and crossovers made for each other. I don't know if I have the Gen. 2 units.
What do you think about waiting until 2024 to consider getting the Steinway system? Get rid of the hum in your current system and maybe try a matching Anthem amp for your Paradigm speakers in 2023 and then see how you like it?
@lonemountainI have a feeling you know some of those guys, I got to talk to John Meyer for 2 minuets, I was star struck, the best part was I got to also meet Roger Nichols at the same workshop, I think it was at an AES convention about '85' or so. I worked with many of the biggest stars in Hollywood but those were the guys who were really cool to me.
Steinway Lyngdorf make every component and their speakers together in exactly the way this thread has tried to describe the best practices of system synergy. The other side of that synergy is the fact that I already have a 15K$ Lyngdorf processor and I couldn't use it in the Steinway system, also I love my surround sound speakers and I couldn't use them in this system.
Sorry I thought I answered this. I have not heard the Lyngdorf system so I don’t what to think about it. I assume it’s a good product (to have a business actually survive on it), but worth the money? No idea.
In your video he talks a lot about the "Story" behind the model he designed, so if you are a fan, it’s a cool video. If you don’t know anything about Lyngdorf, they’re inner tech, you won’t learn much from this. These kinds of videos are effective and convincing you when someone smart like this starts talking about bass that is "so fast, it’s like a real live concert". You tend to believe them but they actually say little about the support information that proves what they are saying is actually true.
John Meyer, Billy Woodman (ATC), Ilpo Martikainen (Genelec), Raymond Cooke (KEF), these folks knew what they are talking about and got straight to it.
By the way, I don't think John Meyer had the first active studio monitor, that was Genelec in the very early 80s. I know as I was hauling their samples round Chicago in the early 80s. No one wanted to hear it! ATC was also building active systems around this time, locally in the UK, mostly custom systems for specific buyers. The Meyer HD1 which had some success for sure, came a bit later, around 1990. By this time Genelec and ATC was already installing large far field active monitors. In the UK ATC had customers like the Astoria Boat owned by David Gilmour. Genelec already well on its way in the monitor business in the US with an active small meter bridge monitors (1031) that completely dominated LA movie score mixing and music recording. You still find people using them!
You are completely missing the idea. Active is not about where the amplifier is, it’s about where the crossover is. Sticking an amp in speaker box using a passive crossover is just the same (passive crossover with lots and lots of wire between amp and speaker) mess repeated. The technical reasons this old fashioned passive system is bad is
1) the losses through the passive crossover with what could be hundreds of feet of copper on the LF crossover in an air core inductor
2) the lack of the amp "seeing" the speaker directly,
3) the changes a speaker presents to a passive crossover as the speaker heats up, and finally
4) the lack of phase control through a passive crossover.
In short, the bulk of the benefit of active is NOT about amp to speaker cable length- that is merely one benefit out of many. I dare say all the money you spent on that wonderful pass labs amp is mostly lost sending it "through" a passive crossover with all those lossy parts and lots and lots of wire that change what the amp sounds like. You think you have 3 feet of wire on your [passive] speaker? Guess again.
I am convinced the passive speaker crowd is just being manipulated by amplifier marketing. Or manipulated by speaker makers who cannot build an active system. What a shame! Now building an active system around pass labs amps and an electronic crossover- different story. That would be remarkable.
@markw1951
Say you buy a 200k $ speaker system then add an amp (Nelson Pass A), is that amp the best it can be for that speaker? The answer is no, unless that amp was designed for each driver in that speaker it is not a perfect fit. The equation is very simple.
Also even the first real hi fi powered monitors that did well in studios the Meyer sound M1 had class A amps up to about 5W the rest was class AB a very high percentage of listening is below 5W. John Meyer told me that himself.
Can't quite imagine a Nelson Pass class A amplifier in a speaker cabinet. So you have a few feet of speaker cable for an outboard amp. I don't see it as much of a problem.
@lonemountain What do you think about the Steinway Lyngdorf Model B system. They have the same speaker philosophy as we do I think. There are some good short videos on their page.
@lonemountainIn production sound 90% of all our energy is to accurately record the actors dialog, we would like to use a boom mic like the Sennheiser MKH-50 all the time but when the stupid directors (yes I'm still bitter) shoot wide and tight shots at the same time we can't get a boom mic in and we have to rely on hidden mics or lav mics hidden inside the actors clothing. The boom operator memorizes all the lines and points the mic at each actor as close as possible to the camera frame line without entering into the shot or throwing a shadow on anything in the frame. The mixer blends all the microphones booms and lavs raising each mic when the actor speaks, it's a lot like playing an instrument that is the actors, we try to minimize background and any noise that would interfere with the dialog.
@donavabdearI find your comments interesting about movies/video. We hear tell over in music about the procedures in location sound. I am solely focused on recording studios and I do not find that to be true there. Al Schmidt, one of the better known "good" engineers (Diana Krall for example) had a story floating about him spending an entire day getting a good snare drum sound. Knowing him, I believe it, he was old school (you MOVE THE MICROPHONE you don’t use EQ). Some of the newer guys using plug ins and zero analog gear are different, but most of their work is not audiophile targeted work. George Massenburg is another one, loves analog, very particular about everything in the studio-his recordings are pristine. The guys I know in between, the ones that work a lot and have multiple projects going all the time, work to get "a sound" Chris Issacs sound in Wicked Game, I know him and he would work all day to get a "cool" sound-not necessarily an audiophile one. Killers Hot Fuss was another, I know him well and he used a lot of mid level end gear to get the sound he was looking for. But that’s the point, these guys are looking for a "sound" that is unique.
Brad
spent an en most of the music recording guys I know, fin that
It cracks me up when I see a thread and a HT enthusiast is going on about capturing the "directors intent". You have no idea what amount of time, effort and budget were devoted to the blueray vs the theatrical release. I can guarantee it was MUCH less compared to the theatrical mix.
@phusisi think you made a great point about what I said about @kingharoldhorn system with years of trial and error concerning amps with the proper speakers. What I'm preaching is the inconsistencies when audiophiles read a TAS article and spend $200k hoping their system is great. Audiophiles can do good research look at the physics, talk to people with more experience and then get the system wrong. That's ok getting things wrong really only enhances our lives getting things wrong for the right reason is life. We are not dealing with understood hard science in sound, microphones, speakers, etc. there will always be room for experimentation in the sound world.
A common theme in in the audiophile world that is so wrong is assuming that the sound engineer doing the recording and mixing is an incredibly dedicated artist who is painstakingly agonizing about every detail of the music. They are often on a time crunch like everyone else there are always many many compromises. Audiophiles are like people who watch House on TV they think the hospital assigned 3 doctors to work on your health problem, nope sound engineers are under the stress of business, time, and outrageously requests by artists who have no idea what they are demanding and will do detrimental things to the music.
Also microphones and original recordings aren't all they're cracked up to be even the best microphones aren't adequate to record very dynamic sounds like a gun shot, keys dangling, or a Saturn 5 rocket. I always used at least 2 or 3 mics for even simple gun shots usually full load blanks that are still much quieter than real gun shots one mic for the direct sound with the gain very low so the signal won't over modulate, another mic to record the first large reflection of the sound with a bit higher gain then another mic farther away to record the echo with hi win to give the acoustic space a little life. All these mics had to have a gain structure that assumed the signal was too dynamic for the mic/recorder and would be put together later in the recording process. There are no predefined levels to set the mics to you have to listen to the space and then guess on how loud the gun / sound is. Even the boom operator who are micing the shot may be holding the mic at a strange angle to accommodate a shadow or an actor who doesn't want the boom in their eye line, lots of compromise even on the biggest movies and recording studios always.
Shane Lee was saying that the three ton riser they were sitting on was lifted by that beast. I think you could see the stunned look on peoples faces in the demo, like they just saw Jaws in real life.
The realities of path length and flare angle means that for a practical sub-woofer, a vented box will always have the advantage at the lowest octaves. The horn is significantly more efficiency at higher bass, but at the deepest, it is not.
Vented will have the advantage wrt. size/extension ratio, yes. Horn sub extension, certainly a traditional front loaded horn while maintain high efficiency and actual loading in its range, will be very big indeed. 20Hz flat, meaning a tune slightly lower, should translate into some 30cf. volume - a behemoth in most domestic environments. So, a FLH provides extension and high eff. as the design and size allows (i.e.: horn path length and mouth area), but with a "practical" demand - debatable in importance and a variable in relation to who you’re asking - will be limited to having high eff. from some 30-40Hz on up. I’ve chosen the tapped horn variant to get a more effective size/extension ratio, although it mostly comes down to higher eff. in the lowest octave and a following steeper roll-off below tune, while also limiting upper extension compared to a FLH. Another important take-away with the tapped horn variant is woofer cone excursion minima at the tune, whereas the sealed chamber-fitted woofer in a FLH will have maximum excursion at the tune. This matters wrt. distortion in the lower range, and also up into the central bass. In reality I could live happily with either a FLH or a TH, but in my particular context has chosen the latter as the most fitting option.
Why then something so large for what is still a relative impediment wrt. extension and, most predominantly with the tapped horn, is bandwidth limited to boot? Because of their sound. Few have experienced horn-loaded bass in their home, and so few can really comment on the perceived nature of true horn-loaded bass here, but suffice to say they sound different compared to direct radiation bass/sub solutions - and by horn-loaded I mean both FLH and TH iterations, not that they sound completely alike either. Bass isn’t just bass, and even smoothly implemented via DBA and room corrected these differences shine through.
If you are recreating the Saturn V, you need the energy at the lowest frequencies, 20Hz and below. You are better off vented. For pure music, you don’t have a lot below 40Hz and dropping quick, horn is great for a sub. I realized the Saturn V was both hyperbole, but also representational. You want to recreate life’s audible events.
You’d be surprised perhaps knowing how much the sheer volume of bass, cone-to-air loading efficiency and central to upper bass fundamentals matter with an attempt at getting a feel for the Saturn V’s blast impact. For sure, getting the infra-sonics in place is of importance for a more complete experience, but for them to really matter this low down you’d need truly prodigious air radiation area. I once heard a pair of SVS SB16-Ultra fire off with the Saturn V launch in the great documentary ’Apollo 11’ on Blu-ray and, believe me, they fell utterly flat - even with a 5-10Hz lower tune - compared to my TH subs in this scene. The SVS’s dug deeper, yes, but the sheer visceral feel for the immense size and the air echoing wallop and "cracking" sound those Saturn V rockets could produce just reached a completely different level via the tapped horns, whereas the SVS’s mostly just rumbled and shook at ground level while never providing the same feel for the size and impact of it all. My TH subs are over 4x the size compared to the SVS's, and so they better make a difference - which they most certainly do in this respect as well.
That’s fair. Essentially rock concert level, somewhat close to the stage.
I am glad you don’t listen to it regular. As much as I love live music, I don’t say yes to the frequent invites I get any more for amplified events and even for the last long while, I have generally enjoyed with ear plugs. I take enough of a "hit" professionally. Have to respect your ears.
Absolutely, got to protect our ears as best as we can.
@donavabdear can comment on this better, but the target playback levels, we could call it the intended levels, are far below what your system is capable of.
Dialed-in reference volume, with the dialogue as the point of reference, has the peaks sit at an occasional 105-110dB’s, although that’s not typical.
10 seats out, 105 would be the max, and usually lower. If you were up on the stage, it could hit 120 with some pieces having extended 110db+ sections. This is starting to become a big issue, starting initially in Europe. Due to the amount of practicing, the musicians total exposure can be at ear damaging levels, especially in the brass section, even worse than percussion though percussion can have higher peaks. Lots of talk w.r.t. regulation, creating practice spaces with more distance between performers, positional changes to reduce total exposure, etc.
Musicians are taking a wild SPL exposure here, with severe hearing damage to follow. Regulations would be most welcome to alleviate these issues.
That’s some journey on your way to audio bliss - kudos. 16th order slopes takes steepness to a new level, with some even going with 32nd order iterations. By comparison I’m now only using LR4 slopes..! And a great looking system for sure.
Thus I have an active system with drivers and amplifiers of my own choosing with every element being easy to change. I think I have the best of both worlds. Besides that the system is not ugly.
That’s indeed an advantageous take-away with an outboard active setup, to have this freedom of component implementation throughout to accommodate one’s specific preferences, while still avoiding the passive cross-over altogether - all-horn at that.
@kingharold Thanks for the story, you make me really want to seek out horns. Glad you understand active speaker synergy, I feel like it is a step into audio reality away from arrogance. I just can’t imagine someone paying so much money for speakers/crossovers and amps that aren’t designed for each other. You seem like exactly the opposite of a person who simply pays a lot of money for flashy audio equipment without considering the objective details.
But that’s just the thing with @kingharold’s setup; the components entailed weren’t specifically designed for each other, but rather carefully implemented after an arduous trial-and-error approach with different hardware combos, if with the aid of professional assistance. This may come down to the same a MFR is essentially pursuing, i.e.: careful implementation, but it goes to show - by virtue of an individual + guests being extremely pleased with the sonic outcome - that an outboard active setup can be a highly successful venture, and with no limits imposed wrt. the chosen speaker principle and following size requirements.
@kingharoldThanks for the story, you make me really want to seek out horns. Glad you understand active speaker synergy, I feel like it is a step into audio reality away from arrogance. I just can't imagine someone paying so much money for speakers/crossovers and amps that aren't designed for each other. You seem like exactly the opposite of a person who simply pays a lot of money for flashy audio equipment without considering the objective details.
donavabdear wrote: "@kingharoldHow did you get into active horn speakers? I would love to hear some not PA horn speakers. I think Im going to go to the audiophile event in Illinois in the spring, hopefully there will be some there."
Back in 1999 I had the idea to build a fully horn loaded speaker system with the bass being played by folded corner horns back in the corners and mid range (actually wide range) and super tweeter horns being well out into the room where they could image better. Obviously DSP was needed to correct the large distance difference between the various horn drivers. It was 2004 before I found a DSP unit which would do everything I needed at a price I could afford. That DSP was the initial commercial offering from DEQX. I built the system then. It was initially somewhat disappointing.
Over the next thirteen years I changed woofers, folded corner horns, midrange horn drivers, added horn super tweeters and went through six different changes of amplifiers as well as upgrading the DEQX. I ended up with Bill Fitzmaurice designed HT Tuba folded corner horns driven by a good Dayton 15” woofer., BD Design Oris 150 horns driven by AER BD3 8” drivers and Fostex t900a bullet supertweeters.
I programmed and reprogrammed and reprogrammed the DEQX over and over. Programming the DEQX is neither quick nor easy. I had the system sounding really good, but I always felt it could be better. Then in 2017 I engaged the services of a DEQX company approved DEQXpert, Larry Owens, Mr. Owens, a very smart man, connected his PC to my PC which was connected to the DEQX, and we communicated via a Skype call while he did speaker calibration and correction, time and phase correction, room correction and crossovers. If I remember correctly he took a total of about six or seven hours in two or three sessions to complete the process. Crossovers were set at 200Hz and 8 kHz with all roll offs being 96 dB/octave.
The speaker/amp system finally sounded as I had imagined it back in 1999. Modesty prevents me from using all the superlatives I feel my system deserves, but when fellow audiophiles come for a listen and say things such as, "that's the best I ever heard that song" I am immensely gratified.
Thus I have an active system with drivers and amplifiers of my own choosing with every element being easy to change. I think I have the best of both worlds. Besides that the system is not ugly.
@kota1I'm sure there have been no movies done in that way. Of course Jim Cameron movies are the best 3D examples. I was going to present binaural recording to Cameron but it would be to much of a jolt listening to sound from a real point of view in a movie. I worked in the same studio for the last 7 years as Jim Cameron while I was doing sound on CSI Miami and Scorpion in Manhattan Beach CA. That technique would not do well for multi camera shoots, and it's hard enough to get a boom mic over an actor let alone a human size head, it would probably be distracting to some actors also.
So my next movie, the camera is a head and shoulders the microphones are literally in the ears of the mannequin the eyes would be 50mm camera lenses. the head could be set on camera dollies and steady cams. When you watch the movie you would be a person in the story always with your POV. The movie would have to be watched with 3D glasses and headphones. Would this give an extra dimension into the story?
@thespeakerdudeThank you for that great DPA article about surround sound formats, DPA is also one of the very best microphone companies anywhere. This article and the YouTube video with it highlights the futility of microphone stacks of any type.
So we have to put on headphones every time we watch a movie, we could incorporate 3D and speakers in a standard headphone / glasses setup, Or we use our phones to set up a grid around our head that would allow lasers can send sound right in your ears, phones already grid your face, no problem. Next problem.
@thespeakerdude thanks for the answer, I'm going to look into this more. I have probably 50 sets of headphones one must be open can't wait to do your test.
You can do it with speakers you just need your head in a clamp. Fails quite miserably at the human factors aspect of product design. Small movements off the centerline of your head destroy timing. No way around that except head tracking which there have been a few systems demonstrated.
Lipshitz? proposed something with two additional speakers near your head on either side.
Want to try something fun? Do you have open air headphones? Put headphones on, turn the main speakers off and run your subs up to 100-120hz.
Not sure 8k video gives you other benefits aside from resolution like high resolution audio give you other benefits like sustained envelopes (a bell will ring longer).
@thespeakerdudeYou are right to say that a recording done with a dummy head has to be listened to on headphones, your job is to figure our why. All the directional information for a soundstage is in a binaural recording how come smart guys like you can't reproduce that on speakers with accurate time alignment, not from the speakers standpoint but from the brains standpoint. 35 years ago I went to and AES convention and one of the vendors was showing what they said was new technology in speaker object placement they said they had taped into what they called -head tones- to make it possible. Do you remember that at all it seemed to never really catch on but the demonstration was amazing we wore headphones and were given a haircut it really felt like we were all getting a hair cut simply through the sound.
For an 85" TV, the recommended THX viewing distance is 9.5 feet. For an 8K set, you need to be about 3 feet away to get the full advantage of the resolution. For a 4K set, you need to be about 5 feet. HD, about 11 feet. A 4K set makes sense to get the best resolution at realistic viewing distances. 8K for home really does not make sense.
It looks like 8K LED\LCD in Europe may be dead in the starting blocks at least in European sized sets. They won't pass efficiency requirements due to the high light loss from the reduced aperture. Don't remember, but expect at 85" you should still have a big aperture if everything scales, but maybe there are some limitations. The 8K, 85" SONY uses 50% more power than the 4K.
With audio we have gone where? Form 44 to 96? Form 2 channel to surround to Atmos? Developments in cameras are helping video progress.
Regarding the log jam in making a recording sound dynamic maybe a better microphone will help alleviate the need for so much technology on the consumer end.
I would love to be able to go out and by a new 8K TV, a pair of active speakers (or more) with an HDMI/digital/RCA input and a remote and be done.
Surround recording should be recorded with a fake head in a binaural format because that is how we hear all other recordings are improper. They may sound wonderful but they aren’t accurate by definition. I have done very few surround recordings but adding the channels by force for the XYZ axis information to be interpreted by your brain somehow to me seems like looking down the wrong
A recording with a head and torso simulation would only work for playback if listened to on headphone corrected for equivalent flat response. Even then, it will only be approximate for any person as it is not their head, torso, or pinna.
For the Spatial Mic, they don’t seem to be tied to ADAT.
No need for expensive multi-microphone & preamp setups – just plug-in and record with either Dante audio networking or USB/ADAT models.
I vaguely remember a paper that discussed using 4 omni microphones in a pyramid shape with a lot of signal processing to extract objects for surround. I did a search but could not find it quickly.
Ok ya got me Sennheiser is the best microphone manufacturer ever ( they also own Neumann). This mic has the capsule to close also but Sennheiser can support the mic with accessories like windscreens blimps and shock mounts that make all the difference. If you wanted to go high end look at this. Schoeps is also a very good company.
@kota1This microphone has all of its capsules very close together that's good for phasing but bad for proper interpretation of direction. It's great that you can record each capsule on its own track but bad that it is designed for Adat / light pipe a format that is going away.
Surround recording should be recorded with a fake head in a binaural format because that is how we hear all other recordings are improper. They may sound wonderful but they aren't accurate by definition. I have done very few surround recordings but adding the channels by force for the XYZ axis information to be interpreted by your brain somehow to me seems like looking down the wrong path.
I’ve spent millions on professional equipment through the years
No award needed for that milestone, respect, even if it was with OPM.
There is so much misinformation about equipment
Its good you joined this forum, what got me through the mysteries of the audio world was stumbling across the Dolby specs when I first got into this hobby with a 5.1 system. I have kind of had one eye open thanks to those specs regarding speaker placement and room setup.
The only way to be content in your system is to not listen to better systems,
What got me to be content was discovering audio "hacks". When I found out I could hack amp spending by going active and get crazy amounts of power for basically the same cost as a good passive speaker, KACHING! When I found out a $300 Zidoo Android box could hack a dolby vision output with my HDR PJ saving me $$$$ on DV content and a DV PJ (which are almost unobtainium) KACHING. I hacked needing to stock pile SACD discs by having a DAC that remasters any content to DSD (Sony knows DSD) KACHING. When I inevitably do lust after new gear (more subs at the moment) I can at least figure out another hack. For my four sub solution it will be getting a DSPeaker 8033 II ($350) instead of buying a new processor with 4 sub outs ($7K). Now, that is not to say if I hadn’t hacked it would be better, but I love every time I go to a movie theater and compare that system to my own and it is no contest in terms of SQ, mine is much more refined.
Thanks for your post, and appreciate your sense of humor. Would be great to check out your virtual system if you could post something. Do you have two systems, one for stereo and one for home theater? In honor of your five year anniversary of being a member here and your 52nd post:
@closenplaylooking forward to checking out horn systems and omni speaker systems at AXPONA, thanks for the note. I have made equipment mistakes in my audiophile system because of my lac of experience. I've spent millions on professional equipment through the years and made really good equipment choices but the new audiophile part of my life is much more difficult. There is so much misinformation about equipment and so much grey area mythology. The only way to be content in your system is to not listen to better systems, seems like a sad endeavor.
@donavabdear Last year's AXPONA had Avantgarde playing their Trio model fully active w/sub......amazing....must audition.....SPENDY! Hope it is there this spring. I never cared for the sound of horns in general until hearing that system as well as the Aries Cerat Aurora (half spendy) last year. Listened to the Trio in years past in passive version.....no thank you. Good topic. There are many audio enthusiasts out here/there that are not confused about this topic but choose not to post because most of these things turn into goofy imbroglios rather quickly.
@kingharoldHello fellow DEQX enthusiast (homebrew 3-way open baffle D'Appolito array)! Lovely system you have there.
@kota1Not looking for the big trophy, just a participation certificate (3"x5" cardstock) or maybe just an "Attaboy!" 7.2.4 theater all active. 🤣
Shout out to @phusisI Enjoy/appreciate your posts.
@kingharoldHow did you get into active horn speakers? I would love to hear some not PA horn speakers. I think Im going to go to the audiophile event in Illinois in the spring, hopefully there will be some there.
@thespeakerdudewhat is your view on the damage the internal vibration inflicts on the amp fidelity in active speaker designs? Have you ever tested this.
Yes to test. For a DSP based crossover, virtually non existent. There is nothing anywhere in the system that a signal passes through a capacitor which can be susceptible. Weak potential analog signal level crossover, but that is mainly a component selection issue. We use a soft silicone encapsulation in some areas in some speakers and our electronics are not open to the interior, but that is as much for reliability. If the speaker is cranking 100db, the distortion is probably already climbing, and the simply large levels mask anything low level, if it was happening. I can't go into details of testing, but as you would expect, multi-tone stimulus comes into play, a tone that could perhaps resonate something on the boards, and then a second reference tone(s), with both of them monitored.
You wrote ".. a real horn loaded speaker at 20Hz," and I’m telling you a 20cf. quarter wave tapped horn with a tune a ~22Hz will do honest and proper 20Hz - period. What isn’t proper is asking a smaller size, lower eff. direct radiator doing the same, even with a surplus of power. And horn sub iterations can be in multiples as well.
The realities of path length and flare angle means that for a practical sub-woofer, a vented box will always have the advantage at the lowest octaves. The horn is significantly more efficiency at higher bass, but at the deepest, it is not. If you are recreating the Saturn V, you need the energy at the lowest frequencies, 20Hz and below. You are better off vented. For pure music, you don't have a lot below 40Hz and dropping quick, horn is great for a sub. I realized the Saturn V was both hyperbole, but also representational. You want to recreate life's audible events.
A pair of corner placed (i.e.: with boundary gain) high eff. tapped horn subs and high eff. pro cinema main speakers with a combined 2.3kW actively per channel can shell out +125dB’s at the LP (~11ft. listening distance), full-range, so backwards math gives an easy 105dB’s with +20dB’s of headroom - within my actual required range.
That's fair. Essentially rock concert level, somewhat close to the stage.
I am glad you don't listen to it regular. As much as I love live music, I don't say yes to the frequent invites I get any more for amplified events and even for the last long while, I have generally enjoyed with ear plugs. I take enough of a "hit" professionally. Have to respect your ears.
The clean (and full-range) dynamic bandwidth not least comes in handy with Blu-ray/4K UHD playback of movies.
@donavabdearcan comment on this better, but the target playback levels, we could call it the intended levels, are far below what your system is capable of.
10th row with a large symphony orchestra during tutties? I’d say 105-110dB’s.
10 seats out, 105 would be the max, and usually lower. If you were up on the stage, it could hit 120 with some pieces having extended 110db+ sections. This is starting to become a big issue, starting initially in Europe. Due to the amount of practicing, the musicians total exposure can be at ear damaging levels, especially in the brass section, even worse than percussion though percussion can have higher peaks. Lots of talk w.r.t. regulation, creating practice spaces with more distance between performers, positional changes to reduce total exposure, etc.
@thespeakerdudewhat is your view on the damage the internal vibration inflicts on the amp fidelity in active speaker designs? Have you ever tested this.
speakerdude, when you state that If my bass to mid crossover is above 120 Hz the bass will leak into the midrange I doubt that you have considered that I am using 16th order (96 dB/octave) crossovers. Your objections to my system are all theoretical because you have never heard them. Those who have heard them , including many audiophiles,have never complained of the things you just "know" have to be wrong with them.
I am bored with hearing your censorious comments on speakers you have never heard. I think this will be my last post on this thread.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
