As for the Focal tweeter, I've experimented with it a little. Not Wilsons, but in Focals.
I think Wilson did two things which worked really well. Surrounded it by felt, and put a custom rear chamber on it, which I believe extended the low end down, making it play a larger part in the speaker response.
Best,
E
|
My question was meant to be aimed at why it took so very long for Dave W
to come to the realization that the old tweeter was such a weak part of
his design. IOW, what precipitated the change ( for the better) after
all those years?
Well,l I can't speak for any successful speaker maker, at all, but my guess is that his personal tastes changed, much like mine have. Wilson Sr. always chose tweeters based on sound alone. He liked bass, he liked extreme imaging. He liked the color in the Focal metal domes. It is hard to sell a high end speaker that sounds like every other. That means, truly neutral speakers are a hard sell. Perhaps the Wilson brand feels it's so powerful that it is OK to be a neutral speaker? Best, E |
One thing that does strike me as a little strange when it comes to
Wilsons...is why it took so very long for Dave W to hear how bad the
long utilized Focal Titanium dome was in all of his older designs.
I'm going to say something that's going to drive the Wilson fanboys absolutely nuts, but I don't mean to. Wilson has gone from having a signature sound to true neutral over time. And I can go over some of the changes I've noted, but Wilson fans out there will think I'm just being mean and sour grapes, and what have you, but I'm not. The truth is the Wilson sound has shifted, for the better, to a true neutral speaker. It's not the same sound. Best, E |
Erik, yes, you are. There are aimed very specifically to location, both
of the speaker and the listening position height etc. Quite shocking in
fact, how a small change in these positions can make a dramatic
difference.
The problem is our ears are not omni directional microphones. No matter how well adjusted the speaker is, If we listen with our chins down (i.e. normal reading position) we will hear a tweeter differently as it is raised up due to comb filtering that occurs at our head/ear. This is how we hear height. That is, take an ideal, point source driver. Listen to it at 30 inches above the floor, then at 60 without moving your head. It will not sound the same. So, I'm very curious how much of an effect these speakers will have. |
I've not heard these speakers. I generally have a favorable opinion of Wilsons, but the position of the tweeter bothers me ergonomically.
I feel like I'll have to keep lifting my head up to hear them correctly.
Am I mistaken??
|
it’s tiring that every Wilson thread brings out class envy which has become so prevalent in our culture.
If you mean pretentious dealers, I'm with you. :-D But lets not ignore the opposite is also true: Snobbery. The belief that money = quality and that certain brands and only those brands can prove my audiophile credentials. |
It is hard to imagine any designer believing that lower speaker impedance is a good thing.
Right?? |
Hi OP,
As soon as you finish your course in AC circuit analysis, and filter theory I'll be happy to answer any questions my may have had.
Best,
E
|
Hi George,
Please share with us what the difference is between the phase angle of an impedance, and the phase angle of the speaker's output.
Thanks,
Erik
|
When solid state-generated watts became cheap, speaker designers started
to care less and less about the impedance of the models they were
creating. Kind of a corollary of the law of supply and demand.
@twoleftears I think this is a good observation. If Genesis only had tube amps, they probably would not have been able to release some of the speakers with the impedance issues they did. On the other hand, I think that with the design tools and computer based optimization, there is no longer any excuse. |
@gdnrbob
Sometimes this is legitimate, and in the past, I could see that it was due to poor design tools.
Like in the early Genesis era. Damn, some of those crossovers are horrible in terms of impedance, but I can see how they got there due to manual trial and error. Attempts to get a certain sound out of the speaker, and not having very easy tools to help you optimize frequency AND impedance at the same time.
I can also see it with something like the giant Apogee true-ribbon speakers. The very technology caused 1 Ohm impedance, but with dynamic systems, I scratch my head.
|
min 1.6ohm ain’t for most. I am always suspicious of seeing such low numbers in a dynamic speaker in the bass. I took apart one speaker and saw circuits there deliberately designed to reduce the impedance. It made the speaker "discerning" of amplifiers. Wilson encases all his crossovers in resin so it is impossible to do the same analysis, but I am so very very curious if this dip is necessary, or a high end secret sauce. |
