AsciLab speakers are about to launch

[DEF]

@AsciLab why the name? It reminds me of some knock-off brand name. And it's close to ASCII... How do you make your customers curious with that name?

 

[staticV3]

why the name? It reminds me of some knock-off brand name.

AudioScienceLab I believe

 

[DEF]

AudioScienceLab I believe

AudioSci would been much cuter <333

 

[rirelien]

@AsciLab why the name? It reminds me of some knock-off brand name. And it's close to ASCII... How do you make your customers curious with that name?

Personally I love their focus on the science and engineering. Names are subjective. If they’re successful, their name will stand for that success.

(Eg Microsoft…)

 

[Matias]

Always reminds me of American Standard Code for Information Interchange - ASCII.

ASCII - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Chaos01]

Hi @AsciLab thx for your replys. I have a question about your design choice of the frequency response. Why did you choose a not so steep EIR (Estimated in roomresponse)? Because of better (more flat) on axis response? Its more a personal taste of steep, not that steep or flat response, i know, but i wanted to ask that question. I took the Data from the A6B (red), which are outstanding good, and did a overlay with a more steep frequency response Speaker, in orange the KefQ Concerto measured by Erin.
Thx

 

[AsciLab]

Hi @AsciLab thx for your replys. I have a question about your design choice of the frequency response. Why did you choose a not so steep EIR (Estimated in roomresponse)? Because of better (more flat) on axis response? Its more a personal taste of steep, not that steep or flat response, i know, but i wanted to ask that question. I took the Data from the A6B (red), which are outstanding good, and did a overlay with a more steep frequency response Speaker, in orange the KefQ Concerto measured by Erin.
Thx
View attachment 420777

It’s because of wide dispersion of top frequency. Our speakers have constant directivity above 8kHz while other speakers normally having narrow dispersion.

Above 8kHz, LW or on axis response more fit to real in room response rather than estimated in room response. If we follow that slope, our top frequency has to be a few dB lower that may make the sound a bit dull.

You will hear our speakers as smooth yet shine air band.

 

[kharan]

Hi @AsciLab thx for your replys. I have a question about your design choice of the frequency response. Why did you choose a not so steep EIR (Estimated in roomresponse)? Because of better (more flat) on axis response? Its more a personal taste of steep, not that steep or flat response, i know, but i wanted to ask that question. I took the Data from the A6B (red), which are outstanding good, and did a overlay with a more steep frequency response Speaker, in orange the KefQ Concerto measured by Erin.
Thx
View attachment 420777

I have expressed some concern previously and but after some thought, I think that to a large extent it is a non issue, and if one desires it can be dealt with EQ.

If there was something that could be improved on the two way Ascilab speakers without turning them into a three way or a cardioid, it would the discontinuity in the directivity between 750 Hz and 2000 Hz, it goes from 110° on each side below 750 Hz, to 60° on each side right above 750 Hz, and slowly goes to 50° on each side. A more regular narrowing between 750 Hz and 2000 Hz would probably be better. Ironically, the 5" models are marginally better than the 6" models on this aspect.

As a result of this, there's a sharp rise in the Sound Power DI better 600 and 2000 Hz which may or may not introduce an undesired impact on the sound at a distance. This is another way of seeing the phenomenon.

Of course, that is just me speculating, speaker design is a matter of compromise, there may be other constraint that prevent Ascilab from achieving this or make Ascilab prioritize other characteristics than this. I would love to hear what @AsciLab thinks.

 

[AsciLab]

I have expressed some concern previously and but after some thought, I think that to a large extent it is a non issue, and if one desires it can be dealt with EQ.

If there was something that could be improved on the two way Ascilab speakers without turning them into a three way or a cardioid, it would the discontinuity in the directivity between 750 Hz and 2000 Hz, it goes from 110° on each side below 750 Hz, to 60° on each side right above 750 Hz, and slowly goes to 50° on each side. A more regular narrowing between 750 Hz and 2000 Hz would probably be better. Ironically, the 5" models are marginally better than the 6" models on this aspect.

As a result of this, there's a sharp rise in the Sound Power DI better 600 and 2000 Hz which may or may not introduce an undesired impact on the sound at a distance. This is another way of seeing the phenomenon.

View attachment 420789Of course, that is just me speculating, speaker design is a matter of compromise, there may be other constraint that prevent Ascilab from achieving this or make Ascilab prioritize other characteristics than this. I would love to hear what @AsciLab thinks.

Sharp rising sound power DI.. Honestly I’m surprised for how can our DI look sharp.

Explaining about your view, It is normal to have steep directivity change between 500 to 2000Hz because it is occurred by diffraction especially narrow baffle. If I use wide baffle, that could be more smooth but can’t get optimal directivity and frequency response above 1kHz. You can see the vertical contour plot and you will understand.

Also, you can see our cardioid model that solved the problem you consider. I hope this answer can help you.

 

[kharan]

Sharp rising sound power DI.. Honestly I’m surprised for how can our DI look sharp.

Explaining about your view, It is normal to have steep directivity change between 500 to 2000Hz because it is occurred by diffraction especially narrow baffle. If I use wide baffle, that could be more smooth but can’t get optimal directivity and frequency response above 1kHz. You can see the vertical contour plot and you will understand.

Also, you can see our cardioid model that solved the problem you consider. I hope this answer can help you.

Sharp is perhaps a little too strong a word, but it is nevertheless a deviation from a linear rise in directivity. For example, we can clearly see a different in sound power DI between the A6B and the Radiant Acoustics speaker between 600 and 1700 Hz.

Of course, the Radiant Acoustics speaker is also much narrower above 5000 Hz and its vertical directivity is nowhere as good as the Ascilab's.

So, if I understand your answer, to get a linear sound power DI rise from 200 Hz to 4 kHz either requires making different trade offs, or building a speaker that is not a two way.

 

[AsciLab]

Sharp is perhaps a little too strong a word, but it is nevertheless a deviation from a linear rise in directivity. For example, we can clearly see a different in sound power DI between the A6B and the Radiant Acoustics speaker between 600 and 1700 Hz.

Of course, the Radiant Acoustics speaker is also much narrower above 5000 Hz and its vertical directivity is nowhere as good as the Ascilab's.

So, if I understand your answer, to get a linear sound power DI rise from 200 Hz to 4 kHz either requires making different trade offs, or building a speaker that is not a two way.

Rising directivity at 1kHz is because of crossover point, vertical lobbing.

We can make the sound power more smooth by set the crossover point much higher but what is worth? Higher crossover makes the vertical lobbing more messy.

You can see the contour plot comparing with Radiant below.

 

[boxerfan88]

Nice! I enjoy reading all the intermediate results and learning about the decisions & compromises made during design. Love it. The Klippel NFS certainly is an invaluable design tool.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yes completely, fascinating to read of design decisions and then to be able to see their consequence.
Keith

 

[kemmler3D]

Heartening to see @AsciLab here with a solid and technically thought-through response for everything. Not every brand is so forthcoming, maybe only @sigbergaudio does as much on a regular basis.

 

[Matt_Holland]

Heartening to see @AsciLab here with a solid and technically thought-through response for everything. Not every brand is so forthcoming, maybe only @sigbergaudio does as much on a regular basis.

From an engineering view point, the two manufacturers you mention, along with brands like those represented by @Purité Audio, appear to leaving most of the mainstream HiFI manufacturers behind.

Can anyone see a company like KEF pursue cardioid radiation in future designs? Apart from having active DSP in their wider ranges, I’m not sure what else they could do to move the game forward considering the excellent work they’ve done on coaxial, directivity, cabinet design, etc.

 

[Purité Audio]

Jack Oklee-Brown has stated ( if I remember correctly) that he would be interested in an active ‘Blade’ design, but I suspect KEF are driven by the market and almost certainly see more acceptance and thus sales in traditional designs.
New companies are always the ‘disrupters’.
Keith

 

[JohnnyNG]

View attachment 395364

View attachment 395365


Finally, yesterday, I completed the measurements. I measured a total of 25 speakers, including the manufacturer's reference sample.

It will take some time to process the representative data and the remaining deviation data before I can post the review, so please be patient just a little longer. Thank you all for your support and anticipation.

Any word on the A6B review?

 

[kemmler3D]

Can anyone see a company like KEF pursue cardioid radiation in future designs?

I think it's possible, at least it's something they could do, but I sort of doubt it. KEF is pretty mainstream, most people have not heard cardioid bass, so convincing the average person to pay extra for it would be pretty hard from a marketing standpoint. In order to understand the benefit you have to understand something about room interaction, which is not universal by any means.

Those of us in the top 1% or better in audio knowledge would be pretty keen on a KEF cardioid but I think they aim for a wider audience.

 

[Matt_Holland]

I think it's possible, at least it's something they could do, but I sort of doubt it. KEF is pretty mainstream, most people have not heard cardioid bass, so convincing the average person to pay extra for it would be pretty hard from a marketing standpoint.

Those of us in the top 1% or better in audio knowledge would be pretty keen on a KEF cardioid but I think they aim for a wider audience.

I tend to agree. I picked out KEF because out of the mainstream brands they are possibly the one who has a marketing strategy that includes a strong element of technical data (their white papers).

I think most hifi punters would be as scared of cardioid as they are active DSP speakers.

 

[kharan]

Rising directivity at 1kHz is because of crossover point, vertical lobbing.

We can make the sound power more smooth by set the crossover point much higher but what is worth? Higher crossover makes the vertical lobbing more messy.

You can see the contour plot comparing with Radiant below.

I appreciate the answer, so between more sound power smoothness and less vertical lobbing you chose less vertical lobbing. That poses the question of the relative audibility thresholds of sound power smoothness versus vertical lobbing. Admittedly I don't have the data, but it seems that you pushed for less vertical lobbing quite a lot.