Those are bipoles. I actually purchased a pair specifically to use in my “shoot-out” of all the various radiation types as documented in the Omni thread.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
omnidirectional loudspeakers = best design available
- Thread starter Mr. Speakers
- Start date
In that home setting, the drapes behind the speakers help reduce the early reflections—I doubt they would sound nearly as good without that. My suggestion, instead of DSP, try moving the speakers well into the room and see how they sound. The Omnis disappear in almost any placement position, but that smearing and brightness might be greatly improved by moving speakers out more. I found the imaging much improved when well into the room in more a near field placement, very little or no penalty in the soundstage size and sense of envelopment.
Keith_W
Master Contributor
He can't. Small room.
Im not talking permanent positioning—just temporary to test. Try moving them up close and personal in an equilateral triangle with 4-5 feet sides. Thsts how I run mine now after gridding out my living room floor and trying multiple placements. It looks like that is doable from the photo. If he does, report the findings. I think he will be dragging them back and forth a lot…
Audionaut
Major Contributor
I wouldn't make any general recommendations for Duevel speakers in particular, because in my opinion, with this type of speaker, the room and, above all, personal taste are even more important than with other types.
In general, in this thread, as in so many others here on ASR and in the usual audiophile scene, I notice this strong aversion and disparagement of other people's opinions. I find that unfortunate.
I am interested in both the tests and the listening descriptions, preferably from people I know and trust. If Anselm Goertz or Amir for example publish a personal listening impression in addition to the measurements, I am interested – but I also allow myself, as with everything else, to make my own personal assessment.
But without any anger.
Audionaut
Major Contributor
In my case, the answer is: because they are far too limited in terms of technology and chassis material.
They are only an alternative in the entry-level segment, and even the very good ones from Sennheiser and KEF cannot and are not intended to replace large-volume home theater installations or large hi-fi speakers. Soundbars are the right choice for people who are looking for a stylish solution for good sound with minimal effort, which is better than what TVs themselves can reproduce.
Okay, but a few steps up from soundbars in that case? What you mention as more large-volume home theater installations..
...maybe in that case, vs/compared to two-channel omnis?
Okay, it's been discussed in the thread before and many deployed atmos speakers are not two-channel omni.
Then we have this thing about recordings in Dolby Atmos Music. How common is that? I don't think Spotify even supports Dolby Atmos Music? By the way, there are probably already threads on ASR that cover Dolby Atmos Music.
Audionaut
Major Contributor
The tester writes very flowerily—but it is also really difficult to describe the subjective sound impression of an mbl radial radiator. Actually, it would be a good task for "How can I qualitatively measure and evaluate subjective impressions?"One more time in case you missed it the first several times it was put to you:
I hope you’re not going to suddenly shy away from data that seems inconvenient for your case?mbl Radialstrahler 116/121/111RC 5 Channel Surround Sound System Page 2
www.soundandvision.com
With a sufficiently large test group n that has statistical significance.
I won't attempt to describe the sound (not on ASR), but I can only advise everyone to listen to the mbl away from the big audio trade shows, in a well-calibrated system, to form their own opinion.
It's a shame that mbl is no longer independent and has been bought out.
Audionaut
Major Contributor
I think that a well-calibrated Dolby Atmos system with the appropriate source material is miles ahead of any stereo system with omnidirectional speakers that is only trying to create an illusion. We agree on that.
However, with a Dolby Atmos system that has to reproduce stereo content, good omnidirectional speakers are probably still an advantage.
david moran
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2017
- Messages
- 54
- Likes
- 82
fwiw:
When Mark Davis and Michael Chamness were designing the first models of the dbx phased-array Soundfield line >40y ago, that is, the three broadband oval (weighted-omni) designs and not the flatback close-to-wall ones, we gave no particular front wall distance advice in my owner manuals because their chief virtue (apart from smooth, immense airiness) of centered playback off-center --- balanced stereo imaging practically everywhere --- held up regardless.
In other words, smooth in-room power response took precedence over any delay / reflection interests. In fact, the second model, the Ten, had its mids and woofers on only the medial (inside) and the lateral (outside) surfaces, and so, anticipating that some customers might want to place them against the front wall, we had a button on the Ten controller to undo the lower-midrange kink created by such augmentation.
But ... when I was setting up my own SF1As in my new batcave basement, with considerable space, I asked Davis (MIT PhD EE/psychoacoustics) how minimally far (ideally) from the front wall he would advise for distance. He said, "I think 5' would be a good place to start, more if you can do it and they are not then too close to you. A ~10s delay, in other words. It should sound and present somewhat differently from what we had in dbx engineering and also most customers." So I did that, and the usual spatial floatiness increased considerably; even more than in living rooms, you could walk around that entire part of the basement and not locate the cabinets particularly.
The front wall being cinderblock, I did have to put up some carpeting to eliminate a touch of 'spittiness'.
When Mark Davis and Michael Chamness were designing the first models of the dbx phased-array Soundfield line >40y ago, that is, the three broadband oval (weighted-omni) designs and not the flatback close-to-wall ones, we gave no particular front wall distance advice in my owner manuals because their chief virtue (apart from smooth, immense airiness) of centered playback off-center --- balanced stereo imaging practically everywhere --- held up regardless.
In other words, smooth in-room power response took precedence over any delay / reflection interests. In fact, the second model, the Ten, had its mids and woofers on only the medial (inside) and the lateral (outside) surfaces, and so, anticipating that some customers might want to place them against the front wall, we had a button on the Ten controller to undo the lower-midrange kink created by such augmentation.
But ... when I was setting up my own SF1As in my new batcave basement, with considerable space, I asked Davis (MIT PhD EE/psychoacoustics) how minimally far (ideally) from the front wall he would advise for distance. He said, "I think 5' would be a good place to start, more if you can do it and they are not then too close to you. A ~10s delay, in other words. It should sound and present somewhat differently from what we had in dbx engineering and also most customers." So I did that, and the usual spatial floatiness increased considerably; even more than in living rooms, you could walk around that entire part of the basement and not locate the cabinets particularly.
The front wall being cinderblock, I did have to put up some carpeting to eliminate a touch of 'spittiness'.
That is spot on. I have a well calibrated 11.1 ATMOS rig for ATMOS and other discrete multichannel recordings, the Omnis pulled out into the room only for 2 channel material. I find the Omnis more satisfying on 2 channel material than trying to DSP the 2 channel on my 11.1 rig.
This is great information - thank you! I've been theorizing that the 10 milliseconds target applies to omnis without ever having tried it myself.
Regarding the radiation pattern shape of the dbx Soundfield speakers, I was fortunate enough to hear a pair some time back in the 1980's. They were spaced a lot wider apart than would have been normal for the listening distance, but even sitting in front of one of the speakers there was still a very enjoyable soundstage centered between them, with the center vocalist where he should have been (despite my location NOT being "where I should have been"!). Unfortunately at the time I was more enamored of other attributes and sadly unappreciative of how amazing that was.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,954
- Likes
- 19,460
I often had my MBL omnis pulled about 5 feet out into the room. And I would listen from anywhere from 8 feet to 6 feet from the speakers. They did things my surround system (in the same room) could not recreate. Just a stunning sensation of space and dimensional imaging.
Getting Omnis well into the room and away from the walls makes a profound difference in the sound. I actually ended up even a little closer to the speakers than you did, maybe about 5’, but that would be room dependent. When they are up close, an interesting experiment is to just lean forward and back to hear the change in the sound, increasing or decreasing the direct to reflected sound ratio.
livinon2wheels
Active Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2024
- Messages
- 223
- Likes
- 145
In my current living situation, pulling the ohm 2000 speakers out into the room more than they currently are is not really gonna happen due to space constraints. They are currently roughly 3 feet from back and side walls and sound good to me. I have not really been in a listening mood lately. Probably will change once the weather gets better.
Check this out from Ohm web site—they suggest seven feet:
ohmspeaker.com
Great Imaging, Real-World Limitations
All three models had extraordinary imaging in a single sweet spot but had other limitations: Walls act as mirrors for sound. With a 360-degree radiation pattern, each wall added the sound of another speaker to the listening room. Therefore, the omnidirectional Walshs needed to be far from walls – seven feet was a good rule of thumb.
What's 35 Years Old and Sounds Better Than 99% of Speakers Sold Today?
Backstory … Walsh 2 is 35 years old and still better than 99% of the speakers sold today. Lincoln Walsh realized that if you took an inverted cone made of…
ohmspeaker.com
MarkS
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,765
- Likes
- 2,837
The was for the original models that had true omni dispersion (in the horizontal plane). Those models went out of production in 1982, and were replaced by speakers with a more tailored distribution, resulting in "much easier placement near walls since the wall reflections are considered in the design".
Sounds great if you have a 30 ft. X 40 ft. X 14 ft. party room man cave in your house.Check this out from Ohm web site—they suggest seven feet:
Great Imaging, Real-World Limitations
All three models had extraordinary imaging in a single sweet spot but had other limitations: Walls act as mirrors for sound. With a 360-degree radiation pattern, each wall added the sound of another speaker to the listening room. Therefore, the omnidirectional Walshs needed to be far from walls – seven feet was a good rule of thumb.
What's 35 Years Old and Sounds Better Than 99% of Speakers Sold Today?
Backstory … Walsh 2 is 35 years old and still better than 99% of the speakers sold today. Lincoln Walsh realized that if you took an inverted cone made of…
As visible in the background of the Detectives home in the "Bosch" series....Check this out from Ohm web site—they suggest seven feet:
Great Imaging, Real-World Limitations
All three models had extraordinary imaging in a single sweet spot but had other limitations: Walls act as mirrors for sound. With a 360-degree radiation pattern, each wall added the sound of another speaker to the listening room. Therefore, the omnidirectional Walshs needed to be far from walls – seven feet was a good rule of thumb.
What's 35 Years Old and Sounds Better Than 99% of Speakers Sold Today?
Backstory … Walsh 2 is 35 years old and still better than 99% of the speakers sold today. Lincoln Walsh realized that if you took an inverted cone made of…
However as shown (the detective is supposed to be an audiophile) - they are located in probably a worst case setup - directly next to wall to wall panoramic glass windows - effectively the reflected sound from the glass windows would completely destroy imaging......
But the presence of the "odd" looking speaker enhances the cred of the character as an audiophile.... (at least for the ignorant!)
Or you can use curtains, bookshelves etc... as methods of mitigating some of the reflections making them much more viable... with due care!
Speaking as a long term owner of bipole/dipole speakers (electrostatics) and wide dispersion 270 degree speakers (Gallo's).... you don't necessarily have to place them out in the room (although that is the best case option)- but you DO have to take the nearby surfaces into account, and plan accordingly.
Similar threads
- Locked
