Measuring for tonal characteristics

[Mivera]

Awesome little monitor that uses the Tlabs Beryllium tweeter. And this outstanding tweeter is 100% made in the USA! Comes with 2 woofer choices, the Scan-Speak illuminator or revelator:

http://www.fritzspeakers.com/CarreraBESpecifications.htm

https://stevefolberg.wordpress.com/...quality-time-with-the-fritz-carrera-monitors/

Here's a speaker that uses the ceramic version:

http://www.vaporsound.com/speakers/aurora/

 

[Mivera]

Not questioning your honesty, just your observations. I don't believe this can be true.

Tim

Well tell me how each of those 4 tweeters sound then.

 

[Mivera]

No, that's the tradeoffs when one doesn't fully understand physics or perception. Remember, I said I would use either to 2.4k.

I would question the Scan-Speak engineers to why they offer 2 version's then.

 

[Blumlein 88]

No like I said you will never see it on a response chart. Look at my 4 examples. All 4 have different dome materials.

AJ is giving important ideas for you. You need radiation pattern plots. You also need response that is not smoothed as much as your examples. Get that info and you will see differences.

 

[Mivera]

AJ is giving important ideas for you. You need radiation pattern plots. You also need response that is not smoothed as much as your examples. Get that info and you will see differences.

They won't indicate tonal differences. You may see more data, but no data that will be useful in determining how the driver will sound.

 

[Mivera]

Since those data sheets weren't comprehensive enough, tell me the difference of how these 2 tweeters sound. Which one will sound more like the mic feeds?

 

[AJ Soundfield]

Let's say if you wanted to build a monitor that would compete with what's out there in the $10000-$15000 price range, which of these tweeters would you choose?

Whichever one had most audiophile visual street cred.
Seriously, $15k for a "monitor"?? More than a small car? That's pure audiophile idiocy. But ok, fine, I'd use the diamond Accuton and get them to make a diamond midbass, put it in a solid gold sealed enclosure filled with argon, skip the crossover filter altogether for the ultimate purity...and sell it for $250k, because we know how compromised a standmount is at $15k.

p.s. I don't use naked domes, but if I did I wouldn't charge $10k much less $15. Super wide dispersion makes things tricky in real rooms...without them resembling an isolation ward. Although that may be fitting for audiophiles. Hmmm

 

[Mivera]

Whichever one had most audiophile visual street cred.
Seriously, $15k for a "monitor"?? More than a small car? That's pure audiophile idiocy. But ok, fine, I'd use the diamond Accuton and get them to make a diamond midbass, put it in a solid gold sealed enclosure filled with argon, skip the crossover filter altogether for the ultimate purity...and sell it for $250k, because we know how compromised a standmount is at $15k.

p.s. I don't use naked domes, but if I did I wouldn't charge $10k much less $15. Super wide dispersion makes things tricky in real rooms...without them resembling an isolation ward. Although that may be fitting for audiophiles. Hmmm

In my experience if you want to make speakers that people buy, you have to make speakers that people enjoy listening to. I've found the "Audiophiles" who like this sort of sound, are willing to spend more money to obtain it. If I was in the business, my goals would be to satisfy the ignorant crowd who likes the sound of the drivers the worlds top engineers manufacture, rather than the penny pinchers. It's really hard to compete with Asian mass producers otherwise.

 

[Purité Audio]

I thought tweeters had much narrower dispersion than mids unless you used some form of waveguide, am I misinformed?
Keith

 

[Mivera]

I thought tweeters had much narrower dispersion than mids unless you used some form of waveguide, am I misinformed?
Keith

You're confusing directionality with dispersion. The higher you go in frequency, the more directional sound is. However the smaller the cone/dome, the better the off axis dispersion is.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

In my experience if you want to make speakers that people buy, you have to make speakers that people enjoy listening to. I've found the "Audiophiles" who like this sort of sound, are willing to spend more money to obtain it.

There are a million companies like that already. Is yet another needed with the same old recipe? I guess.
I don't care what the market wants. We've seen that same nonsense for 30yrs. I'm going to make speakers that meet my standards for fidelity. If a don't sell another one, great. I'll keep my day job.

If I was in the business, my goals would be to satisfy the ignorant crowd who likes the sound of the drivers the worlds top engineers manufacture, rather than the penny pinchers. It's really hard to compete with Asian mass producers otherwise.

This is called an excluded middle argument. There are plenty very high (real)performance drivers between the uber bling and the cheap junk. Unknown to audiophiles, with competent engineering, those can do just fine. I see the B&O and Ki(?) stuff getting raves with those "ordinary" pedestrian drivers. Harmans blind tests show that some of the bling is quite atrocious...audibly.
Different strokes for different folks Mike. No prob if someone likes Patek, loads of jewelry and uber drivers stuck flush on the face of a fart box to radiate 3 dimensionally into a modal room. To each their own.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Mivera]

There are a million companies like that already. Is yet another needed with the same old recipe? I guess.
I don't care what the market wants. We've seen that same nonsense for 30yrs. I'm going to make speakers that meet my standards for fidelity. If a don't sell another one, great. I'll keep my day job.


This is called an excluded middle argument. There are plenty very high (real)performance drivers between the uber bling and the cheap junk. Unknown to audiophiles, with competent engineering, those can do just fine. I see the B&O and Ki(?) stuff getting raves with those "ordinary" pedestrian drivers. Harmans blind tests show that some of the bling is quite atrocious...audibly.
Different strokes for different folks Mike. No prob if someone likes Patek, loads of jewelry and uber drivers stuck flush on the face of a fart box to radiate 3 dimensionally into a modal room. To each their own.

cheers,

AJ

Yes there's a million ways to build a speaker and there's no right or wrong. The market always determines this. The landscape has changed so much over the last 20 years that I don't even have any desire to build speakers anymore for reasons other than personal use. There's just way too many people doing it. Hard to be original when pretty much everything's been done. The winners are the ones who have the deepest pockets to market them. Electronics are much more interesting. Smaller and easier to ship as well

 

[AJ Soundfield]

AJ you have updated your website, the speakers look great, really interesting designs.
Do you just confine yourself to sales within the US?
Cue for Thomas to wheel out 'barrowboy' phono.
Keith.

Thanks.
Yes pretty much, though one or two have escaped to the great white north. I would have to seriously consider the issues of shipping across the pond.
Barrowboy phono?

cheers,

AJ

p.s. sorry for late reply, was watching the Motogp season opener.

 

[Thomas savage]

Thanks.
Yes pretty much, though one or two have escaped to the great white north. I would have to seriously consider the issues of shipping across the pond.
Barrowboy phono?

cheers,

AJ

p.s. sorry for late reply, was watching the Motogp season opener.

he means this...

times look tough keith where has all the veg gone?? i can see why you're going transatlantic in your aspirations.. desperate times, i will give you 50p for the sleeping bag mate... if it helps

 

[AJ Soundfield]

Yes there's a million ways to build a speaker and there's no right or wrong.

Right, but for 30+ yrs, sticking an uber dome over an uber cone in a bling box isn't a million ways, it's the same damn way.

The market always determines this.

Does it? Or has it been by choice? What choice I may add?
You're right in the sense of if that same old same old makes someone happy, by all means they should do so. But not all of us are convinced of that logic.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Well tell me how each of those 4 tweeters sound then.

I cant; I'm not qualified. But this is exactly what Harman does. They design speakers to a measurement target (in their case, linear) at each price point, then preference test them to see what people like. As it turns out, people like linear, and the closer you can get, the more they like it. Maybe that's why Harman designs them that way. Can you tell me how Harman pulls this off without correlating measurement with sound? I respect your POV and mean no offense, but if I'm looking for an expert to interpret measurements for me, I'm going to go with Olive or Toole ahead of you, Mike, in spite of their low post counts.

Tim

 

[Mivera]

I cant; I'm not qualified. But this is exactly what Harman does. They design speakers to a measurement target (in their case, linear) at each price point, then preference test them to see what people like. As it turns out, people like linear, and the closer you can get, the more they like it. Maybe that's why Harman designs them that way. Can you tell me how Harman pulls this off without correlating measurement with sound? I respect your POV and mean no offense, but if I'm looking for an expert to interpret measurements for me, I'm going to go with Olive or Toole ahead of you, Mike, in spite of their low post counts.

Tim

You better write all of the driver manufacturers in the world and tell them they should slim down their selection to only 1 option then. Because all drivers sound the same no matter what anyways.

While your at it write Mark Levinson and tell them their video is misleading. Listen to the part where the role the dreaded ear plays in engineering their products.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

tell me the difference of how these 2 tweeters sound.

Sighted or blind? The raw FRs show significant deviation, so differentiating them should be easy. Preference is another thing altogether. Blind, I might prefer the ceramic. The extra sound power >10k tends to add a bit of "airiness" to the highs. I like that.

Which one will sound more like the mic feeds?

Who on earth would know that? You can't "hear" a mic feed, only a transduction of it. Which one? The console NS10s? The soffit main monitors? Or....?

You better write all of the driver manufacturers in the world and tell them they should slim down their selection to only 1 option then. Because all drivers sound the same no matter what anyways.

Being silly now. Each case you are presenting with sufficient data is indicating quite audible differences in FR alone.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

You better write all of the driver manufacturers in the world and tell them they should slim down their selection to only 1 option then. Because all drivers sound the same no matter what anyways.

While your at it write Mark Levinson and tell them their video is misleading. Listen to the part where the role the dreaded ear plays in engineering their products.

Well, now you're arguing against positions that haven't been taken instead of answering the question. Carry on.

Tim

 

[fas42]

As accurate as we try to reproduce the mic feeds in our systems, no 2 systems sound the same. Especially speakers. There's 1000 ways to build a speaker, but at the end of the day what one chooses is a matter of subjective taste. Is there any method of measuring tonal characteristics? If so, how does it look on paper?

The solution in my world is to eliminate the "sound of the system" - if all I hear is the sound of the recording then I'm in pretty good shape - every setup I play with, or listen to is "subjected" to this type of scrutiny, by me - if I can "hear" the speaker, then it, the system, ain't workin' right ...

That's my method of measuring tonal characteristics - the closer I get to the replay system being anonymous, the better ... now, how to do that with a non-human "instrument" is the interesting bit ...