fubarnow
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2023
- Messages
- 33
- Likes
- 13
Open Baffle
Home, Open Baffle Speakers - PureAudioProject
www.pureaudioproject.com
HiSo coming back to the room EQ and room treatment topics, including multi sub approach … Been doing a lot of reading on this topic past days and I am starting to lean in a fully different direction. I am sure this will be sacrilege for many here, and that’s ok, we can discuss like adults … but my conclusion is that if a speaker requires EQ and room treatment to sound right, it is a flawed design to begin with. Thoughts?
On the multi sub approach specifically, I am referring especially to a post by our local very large brain (much bigger than mine, that’s for sure) @j_j that really got me to thinking and researching more deeply …
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...fferent-than-digital-right.37657/post-1490035
So coming back to the room EQ and room treatment topics, including multi sub approach … Been doing a lot of reading on this topic past days and I am starting to lean in a fully different direction. I am sure this will be sacrilege for many here, and that’s ok, we can discuss like adults … but my conclusion is that if a speaker requires EQ and room treatment to sound right, it is a flawed design to begin with. Thoughts?
On the multi sub approach specifically, I am referring especially to a post by our local very large brain (MUCH bigger than mine, that’s for sure) @j_j that really got me to thinking and researching more deeply …
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...fferent-than-digital-right.37657/post-1490035
I have no issues with any of that. I personally prefer FULL range speakers, and agree with @j_j that the standard 80Hz crossover to subs that most of us use is too high for critical listening. I have no issue with it for home theater as the added visual stimulus makes such subtle differences vanish for most listener/viewers.So coming back to the room EQ and room treatment topics, including multi sub approach … Been doing a lot of reading on this topic past days and I am starting to lean in a fully different direction. I am sure this will be sacrilege for many here, and that’s ok, we can discuss like adults … but my conclusion is that if a speaker requires EQ and room treatment to sound right, it is a flawed design to begin with. Thoughts?
On the multi sub approach specifically, I am referring especially to a post by our local very large brain (MUCH bigger than mine, that’s for sure) @j_j that really got me to thinking and researching more deeply …
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...fferent-than-digital-right.37657/post-1490035
I have no issues with any of that. I personally prefer FULL range speakers, and agree with @j_j that the standard 80Hz crossover to subs that most of us use is too high for critical listening. I have no issue with it for home theater as the added visual stimulus makes such subtle differences vanish for most listener/viewers.
This applies to 2.1 set-ups? (That is, a single sub only, with L+R main speakers.)we build speaker systems designed primarily for music where the subs play up to 100hz ... We've had zero issues with localization during development ... and have zero customers experiencing this as a problem.
Thanks, was aware of PAP and early on took a look at them. After some research (never actually heard them, only what I have read), these do not appear to be what I am looking for … mainly to say, not an accurate/transparent (flat FR) transducer. Many seem to like them, but I am certain I would not vs the many other well engineered loudspeakers I have auditioned recent months. I expect they are designed via subjective rather than objective methods (as are many loudspeakers!)Open Baffle
Home, Open Baffle Speakers - PureAudioProject
www.pureaudioproject.com
Stupid Prizes handed out!except maybe for @Absolute who called me stupid
Storm has really great support too. They have removed into my system when necessary and answered many questions as well.Trinnov hands down. Their support is the stuff of legends.
I'm running ~80Hz crossovers in two of my systems, but both seemed subjectively better when I had a pair of subs located near the primary speakers.Since we build speaker systems designed primarily for music where the subs play up to 100hz (24db/octave roll-off, and with a slight overlap as the speakers aren't -6dB down until about 80hz) I guess I have to disagree with this.
We've had zero issues with localization during development (otherwise we would have chosen a lower crossover) with this configuration, and have zero customers experiencing this as a problem. So that 80hz crossover is too high for critical listening is not true as a blanket statement like that.
Perhaps the type and steepness of the crossover plays a part?I'm running ~80Hz crossovers in two of my systems, but both seemed subjectively better when I had a pair of subs located near the primary speakers.
Since you have spent time working on this very issue for your business I won't disagree with you in your application, but in my experience when a sub is crossed at ~80Hz, in most rooms you can locate the sub even when blindfolded. The sound is not without a directional component.
Gents … thanks for the great comments on this, except maybe for @Absolute who called me stupid … I know my statement was an over generalization and I probably didn’t express myself very well. What I was trying to say is a solid speaker design should provide mostly accurate reproduction without EQ or room treatment in normal living environments, and only this would be needed to achieve “perfection”. I suppose what I am disagreeing with (feel free to call me stupid again) is the emphasis placed on room treatment and EQ by some as being the end all be all of the equation. I think it is important, certainly, but not more important than the speaker design itself. Though of course one could argue it is equally important. Anyway, this conversation is not me trying to decide for or against EQ or room treatment, just an open conversation on something I have been curious about. I still have some type of EQ system on the must purchase list, no doubt about it.
I sincerely apologize for how that came across, implying that was not at all my intention. Searching for the graph of Dunning-Kruger gave this result which I found funny in a side-poking kind of way.Gents … thanks for the great comments on this, except maybe for @Absolute who called me stupid
Perhaps the type and steepness of the crossover plays a part?
I had a sub using the plate amp cutoff of 80Hz, but it still made noise at 140Hz with a test tone.
It is more like a couple of hundred Hz.If 80Hz is the cutoff for localisation then needs a cliff like filter.
I'm running ~80Hz crossovers in two of my systems, but both seemed subjectively better when I had a pair of subs located near the primary speakers.
Since you have spent time working on this very issue for your business I won't disagree with you in your application, but in my experience when a sub is crossed at ~80Hz, in most rooms you can locate the sub even when blindfolded. The sound is not without a directional component.
This applies to 2.1 set-ups? (That is, a single sub only, with L+R main speakers.)
I don't disagree, I just want to clarify. Thanks!