AsciLab speakers are about to launch

[ascilab]

Are the measurements at spinorama.org flipped?

In the frequency response graph, the C5B appears to go deeper frequencies than the C6B. Although designing a larger enclosure for the C6B would allow for extension into deeper frequencies, this would result in a larger overall size.
Alternatively, adding weights to the passive radiator can achieve lower frequencies, but this comes at the cost of reduced sensitivity.

The C6B outperforms the C5B in terms of maximum SPL, sensitivity, and THD at high SPLs.

The difference in tonality scores is minimal, so it can be considered that both models have the same tonality.

Currently, the test data for the C6B shows a slight bump in the 60-70Hz range. By adding a small amount of weight to the passive radiator, it is easy to achieve an FR graph similar to that of the C5B.

 

[staticV3]

Are the measurements at spinorama.org flipped? The summary says the smaller version goes deeper, is flatter and has a higher tonality score.

I don't think they are.

Bass extension is identical between both versions, the larger one just has less distortion (=more headroom) at the expense of slightly worse directivity match.

 

[EERecordist]

Best with your new product! The listener directivity animation is a good way to visualize it.

 

[Duke]

The final sales version will have rounded edges as shown in the rendered photos registered on spinorama.org, so it is expected to show a smoother response compared to the current measurements. The current measurements are from a version without rounded edges. Once we obtain the final version data, we will send it to you again.

What is the approximate radius of the round-over, if you don't mind?

What differences do you anticipate in the measurements?

In your opinion, does the round-over make an audible difference?

In your opinion, does the round-over make a difference in the imaging?

I'm not asking for documented proof - you have gained my trust with the obvious competence your designs demonstrate. Well done!!

 

[ascilab]

What is the approximate radius of the round-over, if you don't mind?

What differences do you anticipate in the measurements?

In your opinion, does the round-over make an audible difference?

In your opinion, does the round-over make a difference in the imaging?

I'm not asking for documented proof - you have gained my trust with the obvious competence your designs demonstrate. Well done!!

9mm in this design.

On axis response will get a little more smooth.

Round over affects to reduce diffraction. What affects the diffraction can be also chamfering, the baffle shape and driver placement.

The diffraction affects on axis response smoothness and also off axis responses. This is very important to make the smooth directivity.

So, I believe round over or something to manage diffraction can make audible difference and imaging.

Thanks for your kind words!

 

[phoenixdogfan]

The Contour Plot provided by Klippel includes full-range frequency and radiation pattern information in a single graph, which can be challenging for beginners to interpret at a glance. To make it more intuitive, I exported the original data from the Klippel Contour Plot and created separate radiation patterns for each frequency. This approach is expected to help beginners easily understand the graphs.

I was looking at that and wishing it had been around when I was cutting my teeth on this information. Maybe the presentation technique is something you'd care to share with reviewers like Amir and Erin in the US, as it would be a great aid in educating potential customers in how radiation patterns affect the way loudspeaker FR is perceived in a normal listening environment, and why a smooth directivity pattern is so important.

Great job. Looks like one or more of your offerings could be headed to my short list for upgrades. Look forward to seeing what the model with the Purifi woofer will measure like. Welcome to ASR.

 

[Daverz]

Really impressive vertical beamwidth for a 2-way design. Is this due to the crossover?

 

[ascilab]

Really impressive vertical beamwidth for a 2-way design. Is this due to the crossover?

Yes. Due to low crossover and calculated distance of that drivers we could make the vertical null around +/-90 deg. Durable tweeter, deep waveguide, steep filters are needed. Though its low crossover than typical, it’s still having very low harmonic distortion around crossover point and low IMD over the tweeter band.

 

[gr-e]

Round over affects to reduce diffraction.

I don't really see any edge diffraction in the current version. There is some above 7k, but I would guess it's related to the waveguide.
In any way, it's a good design, curious to see how the improved version compares.

 

[ascilab]

I don't really see any edge diffraction in the current version. There is some above 7k, but I would guess it's related to the waveguide.
In any way, it's a good design, curious to see how the improved version compares.

You’re right. Due to deep and custom designed waveguide and narrow baffle, diffraction doesn’t be aware in this non-round over design. It’ll be very subtle.

 

[sigbergaudio]

The effect of rounded vs harder edges is somewhat exaggerated, and as you say - subtle. But visually one might be preferable over the other depending on the look you are going for.

Impressive measurement results, from what I can see these will probably sound balanced (and good) in-room! Good luck on your endavour!

 

[alebucc91]

Dove si può acquistare?

 

[staticV3]

Dove si può acquistare?

On @ascilab's website presumably, which is not live yet.

PS: Please use English on ASR.

 

[Purité Audio]

Kii Seven killers?
Keith

 

[ascilab]

About our waveguide, We were struggle to tame the diffraction without round-over.
Vertical and horizontal edge didn't be a problem. But the corner edge occurred 2~3kHz dip due to further distance from the end of the waveguide.
We also tried square type waveguide to cover to the corner edge. Though the diffraction problem we were struggle for was disappeared, square shape waveguide didn't fit our goal design.
So we simulated a circle type waveguide having square type curve surface, Then it finally solved both exterior design and acoustic problems.
That's why our waveguide has a little different shape.

 

[ascilab]

A6B rendered images.
Aluminum Purifi 6.5" woofer and dual Purifi PR will be used.
We have a plan to design both passive and active version. The only difference will be the back plate.
Guess we can show the detail and measurement in a month or two.

 

[Duke]

About our waveguide, We were struggle to tame the diffraction without round-over.
Vertical and horizontal edge didn't be a problem. But the corner edge occurred 2~3kHz dip due to further distance from the end of the waveguide.
We also tried square type waveguide to cover to the corner edge. Though the diffraction problem we were struggle for was disappeared, square shape waveguide didn't fit our goal design.
So we simulated a circle type waveguide having square type curve surface, Then it finally solved both exterior design and acoustic problems.
That's why our waveguide has a little different shape.

VERY creative! VERY nice!!

 

[GXAlan]

With the active version can you consider using PowerCon 20 connectors? That’s nicer than standard IEC cables and if you have in/out, it makes it easier to daisy chain the power.

The worst thing about active speakers is independently triggering them if your power strip isn’t in the center.

With Neutrik PowerCon, you can daisy chain them easily.

 

[kemmler3D]

Purifi + serious WG + those measurements... definitely a line to watch. Great job on what I have seen so far, these (apparently) deserve to sell well.

 

[Holmz]

Hi, I’ve been a member of this website.
Due to personal reasons (studying acoustics), I took a break from being active in the ASR community for a while.

Thank you for remembering me.

Were you involved in the design of these ASCILAB speakers?