Shouldn’t we be looking more at PA speakers?

[RobL]

Thanks for sharing. What’s interesting is that it’s just “eight 3.5-inch neodymium high-frequency drivers and a proprietary waveguide that provides an impressive 120° of horizontal coverage and 40° of vertical coverage”.

We used to laugh at soundbars and their small woofers, but maybe the tech is getting to the point where we can do a lot more interesting things.

Do you just have one? Most people think that the ultra wide horizontal dispersion is bad for home listening but maybe with them in stereo works fine.

Yes, EV apparently put waveguides on the full range drivers to widen the dispersion…works quite well from what I can tell from walking around the speaker while listening.
I have just the one unfortunately, so any comparisons I have done with with my other speakers is only in mono. This EV has a fun factor(?) to the sound that makes it very pleasant to listen to. If I turn the bass down 3-4 db (it has rudimentary eq on it’s app) I can make it sound quite similar to a single 8361 playing mono, but it sounds maybe more lush? I’d imagine a stereo pair would sound quite acceptable but being 7’ tall might disqualify it for most domestic spaces lol. It makes a helluva bluetooth speaker though!
I thought about buying another one to have a pair to rent out, just not sure I want get into that.

 

[gnarly]

Yes, amp noise definitely becomes an issue, especially at the woofer channel. I had first used a 97 dB rated Faital Pro 12PR320 and later switched to the 94 dB rated PHL 3411, while I kept the same compression driver Celestion CDX1-1747. Surprisingly, while I would clearly notice the amp noise from the Hypex FA123 from my listening position with the Faital, the slightly lower sensitivity PHL does not transmit the noise so that I hear it anymore.

Something seems off....
There shouldn't be any amp noise with a woofer channel...ever, I think. Even a 100dB sensitive woofer design, after low-passing shouldn't let any thermal amp noise be audible.

I'd revisit and look to gain staging, or some connection problem, or Hypex filter problem. I just don't see how the 3 dB sensitivity difference between the 12PR320 and PHL3411, can have any effect with regard to noise.

Btw, what's the xover freq?

 

[gnarly]

Last time I checked PA speakers could be had as 2 and 3 way with or without horn in various sizes and shapes. Just like residential speakers.

Absolutely. If driver sizes, build shapes, and directivity designs are the same, the only difference between home and pro is usually the quality of the drivers in terms of SPL design.

 

[Waxx]

Some gear is actually better than most home hifi stuff, but certainly not all.

Their drivers are among the better arround, but ofthen the cabinets are build for big spaces, and don't work close by. Some woofers (mainly subwoofers) have such heavy cones (to go loud and low) that they need a few watt to work right. Couple that with high sensitivty and that means they only work too loud for at home in small spaces.

For diy'ers, pro audio driver brands like B&C, BMS, Faital Pro, JBL, Beyma and Emminence (among others) give drivers that are among the best. Just build the right cabinet for a small space with it, and you can beat the best smaller hifi driver. That is what JBL basicly does with their top range monitors (JBL 4367 or M2). In combination with a dsp or a very advanced passive crossover, this could be the way to the best sound.

But standard pro audio cabinets are mostly not, their goal is different, and it's hard to use them in small spaces, except when they are build for it. Their goal is to cover big spaces and are tuned for that, with horns or waveguides that don't work close by.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

Absolutely. If driver sizes, build shapes, and directivity designs are the same, the only difference between home and pro is usually the quality of the drivers in terms of SPL design.

And heavy duty plastic paint instead of veneer or five layer glossy.

 

[Chr1]

Let's face it: speakers, like all components of home hifi are prone to the luxury audiophool jewellery thing. If you want quality speakers capable of high fidelity at high volume you can get far better bang for buck from the pro-audio world. You may not get furniture grade finish and you will possibly need to use subs. I think that this is a good thing and the fact that most pro-audio speakers are made for >70Hz actually makes this easy. I find it amusing that there is so much praise here for small studio monitors for near-field use but complete disdain for the bigger stuff for bigger spaces. Obviously you probably won't want bigger pro audio speakers for a small room, low levels, or if WAF is a high priority. But if you want to go loud with good sound and without spending a small fortune it's kinda a no-brainier, I reckon. Like most things, you get what you pay for but the higher quality gear definitely warrants a look.

PS Definitely look elsewhere for subwoofers however. As stated previously most pro-audio subs are huge and mostly made for massive volume and no lower than about 40Hz

Also, if you don't want to go active, many of the better brands also make/made passives too. Less common these days but still an option.

 

[Anton D]

Good point, when I was looking at them I figured I'd want two of the 16s for stereo
Most importantly I almost never listen in the 'sweet spot' I'm usually somewhere else in the room doing things while the music is playing. So the even coverage is a big plus. I realize that likely makes me an outlier in this world.
The high output would be completely unnecessary (unless the neighbors get more annoying)

The size of the Bose was part of what made them appealing. If I could get used to the black pole sticking up that high, they would stand out less than a lot of regular speakers.
View attachment 343157

I admit to liking the look.

I’d like to compare them with the similar looking Mackie!

SRM-Flex | Portable PA Systems | MACKIE

Purchase the SRM-Flex Portable PA System to enjoy the legendary sound system you love in a portable design. This system gives you maximum sound power and dispersion.

mackie.com

 

[617]

Narrow directivity is more advantageous the smaller a room is. PA speakers would be a great solution for many listeners if their tonality was adjusted suitably and they looked nicer. If you have a small listening room, PA speakers with large woofers and waveguides are a good option if sound quality is your main concern. Dynamics are in a total different league, especially in the treble.

Audiophile drivers are like toys compared to even a mid-price 12" pro woofer. I have 12" B&Cs and they completely outclass any audiophile speaker.

Unfortunately, they are huge, ugly and don't produce any bass.

If you go to Japan (or youtube) you'll find enthusiasts running huge horn systems in very modest spaces. There's a reason for that, they sound incredible, with clarity and intimacy that smaller speakers cannot create.

Audiophile speakers with 8"+ woofers will get you a better balance of dynamics and bass, but sound less clear in smaller spaces, in my opinion. Cardioids may be another matter, however, but they are still an exotic design.

 

[Dougey_Jones]

Apples and oranges I should think. The Bose EQ is really a frequency response thing. Dirac/Audyssey are supposed to be more time-based, but a 901 is not designed to have good time response at all, it will have a very mixed time response. Now could you run the Dirac just for the lows? Probably since you can in Audyssey and ARC. That should get more even bass response than the Bose EQ.

In what universe does Dirac not take the starting FR and correct it to match the target?

The main thing people use room correction for is FR.. The 901’s have very truncated treble, Dirac’s default curve would do whatever it could to correct that.

 

[tmuikku]

In general, I think that PA speakers should not be used for home listening. Mostly because the radiation pattern is so narrow, a critique that I would also direct at using studio monitors. If people find these to sound 'too clinical,' a notion that often arises when dissatisfied users talk about their experience, I think what they actually perceive as problematic is not the neutral frequency response but the rather restricted image in a stereo presentation. It's just so tiny, the stage. Beautiful, but small, like a little diamond. You cannot be engulfed by sound when two 90 degree horizontal dispersion speakers create the stereo illusion for you from a stereo base of 3 meters or so. Those speakers are meant to illuminate a much bigger space, from a much wider base at each side of stage in a big room.

Hi, you can get big stage without loud lateral early reflections just by having the speakers wider apart and the image is as big as is baked into the recording. The big image you seem to like is due to early reflections "enhancing", but there is downside to this and it's just important to be aware of in order to avoid confusion. It's not just speakers and room that makes the sound, but also our auditory system! Not knowing this subjects to confusion.

Difference is, with small enough listening triangle compared to room acoustics and speaker directivity your auditory system is able to split sound into two separate neural streams that are basically direct sound as foreground stream that is now in top of your perception, and room sound as background to this. When this happens, our brain pays involuntary attention to what is on the recording somewhat suppressing the local room sound. When this happens the direct sound, that is on the recording, has all the clarity in the world, while the room sound is now the envelopment. The envelopment could be quite miserable though, unless well positioned setup, suitable acoustics and so on, but the important thing is how your auditory system is on it making a difference.

Neither clarity or envelopment can happen if you enhance the image with strong local room early reflections, if there is no stream separation auditory system doesn't consider it important but just noise basically, no clarity, no envelopment, doesn't pay attention to it and you'd perceive a spacious sound somewhere portion of the room where the speakers locate. This is more relaxing sound and people seem to like it, and consider it as the home hifi sound. But to me for example, the hifi sound is with the stream separation, when my brain gives focus to the sound. But in fact I like both, because some recordings sound better on either likely due to the engineer optimizing for either perception by using microphone and mixing techniques that sounded good with their monitoring situation regarding this. This is something people don't seem to consider very much and neither would I unless I happened to read Griesinger studies.

So, what I'm trying to say is there is third factor besides speakers and room that is very important for perceiving stereo sound and almost nobody is talking about it, which makes a lot of confusing information float around. There is two perceptions to stereo that your brain makes no matter what your speakers and room are, and knowing about this allows one to adjust the system to liking. It doesn't have to be strictly either or, "spacious sound" or "near field direct sound" like traditionally thought: if you find transition distance where your brain locks in or not, you can just choose at will per recording or mood by moving a little, bit closer of further from speakers. Now, if you have wide radiating speakers without toe in and reflective room, it is very likely the transition (stream separation) happens very close to speakers so you'd likely have mostly the hazy sound available in such system, that's only half victory. With directional speakers in domestic room, like PA speakers, and with considering positioning and perhaps tuning room acoustics, it's possible to have the setup so that both listening distances sound nice, with or without stream separation. One could then adjust the listening postion so that the stream separation happens around listening spot, lean forward to get clarity and nice 3D sound, lean back for relaxed hazy frontal sound. This would be good speaker setup, not just good for one stereo sound, but two, which are very different. Some recordings work better on either and some work with both, and you can switch between them at will by changing listening distance a bit.

So, there is no need to argue about this stuff in my opinion, either work. This is just additional information here, if someone is interested about his stuff see basis for it nicely laid out here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ustics-links-and-excerpts.51487/#post-1853376

 

[changer]

Yes tmuikku, this is why PA systems in big rooms like a warehouse sound so nice, because the base of the stereo triangle is very wide and in front of the stage you sit just right in between. But my European living room is not a warehouse. So I cannot go for the narrow pattern, wider base approach, unlest I would position the speakers in the middle of the room and this is no option.

There is even more options. I am still thinking how I can cheaply implement a Haas kicker with my system to add ambience -> https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...range-line-array.242171/page-100#post-4631144

 

[tmuikku]

Yeah practical issues are a concern, something to be aware of choosing speakers. Although, I'm not sure I can agree to your comment in general, I've found out I need only slightly wider base for naturally wide stage with stream separation happening, speakers about at 40deg angle from median plane, so this is only little bit wider than equilateral triangle. Given that stream separation happens quite close, about 2.2m away from speakers with my setup it's actually quite average setup as many seem to have about ~3m listening triangles. I'm speculating that quite bit much narrower radiation pattern would be needed to extend the transition all the way to sofa, but I could accommodate that in this "normal" living room. It could be though, that if you must sit other side of the room, speakers on the other, and have them fit on same bench as TV, yeah then the options are quite limited, hazy sound it is. One could still take a foot rest and go sitting much closer to speakers if you wanted to, to get stream separation.

Anyway, what ever works for each, one could still utilize the stream separation to one's advantage, so trying to promote awareness about our auditory system and it's part on it all more so than trying to promote PA speakers over Hifi speakers or the other way around As long as one knows which side of the transition feels better, it's quite straight forward to gravitate towards a system that one likes better.

ps. I must add much of this is me speculating based on Griesinger studies and my own observations experimenting with my listening setup, few visits of my friends listening my setup, and my visits to their setups, very small sample set. I really don't know whether this is common thing for most setups, I'm speculating a lot. I hope there was more response what everyone think about it, thanks.

 

[changer]

It could be though, that if you must sit other side of the room, speakers on the other, and have them fit on same bench as TV, yeah then the options are quite limited, hazy sound it is.

Luck for me, I do not find the speakers to sound hazy beyond stream separation distance. Before your whole Griesinger stuff started, I had noticed the same when I was sitting on the carpet close to the speakers. Very different presentation, and beautiful for sure. I thought it rather sounded warehouse rave grand than audiophile fine, but anyways, very enjoyable.

But I can live with the other presentation as well. The distances you established in your example means either the speakers would need to 1.1 meters from my frontwall or the couch. Both is practically impossible in our room. But for US citizins with big houses, they should definitely consider this.

 

[tmuikku]

So you've stumbled on my posts earlier? I guess I've spammed it enough many times then

Yeah I do not know your place, your speakers or record collection nor what you like and what is practical for you and all that. I do not even know why would people prefer either, very likely due to many reasons each with their own.

Yeah, the hazyness I refer to is quite subtle in the end. Our living room is with normal furnishing and has comfortable acoustics, and while the transition is very distinct and easy to spot, the sound is just fine everywhere in the house. By hazyness I mean localization gets inaccurate, and timbre changes in a way, get's bit darker perhaps (DI and toe-in). Hazy is best term I can use to describe it, other words could be bloated and less clear. Of course it still sounds nice anywhere, but the edge is kind of gone past the transition.

This stuff would be important to know, if one wants the sound, and keep on purchasing amplifiers and DACs and all that never getting enough resolution and definition and engagement and all that, it would be nice to know that the problem is not in the gear but brain is just not paying attention, right? Perhaps that kind of search has already let to close listening distance though.

If you have spare time some day, try and find the distance where the perception changes, and then just listen both sides of it as you wish, by moving a little. Both sides seem to define each other in a way. Try mono recording for maximal effect. Now that you have listened it we should be able to relate to each others words better, and you'd know I write colorfully to try get max attention to the topic or, if what seems profound difference to me doesn't necessarily mean too much to you, so you could relate how relevant my posts are to you. Or, one could try and ask this thing from anyone we interact with. Thanks responding by the way!

ps. Even if the difference seems relatively small, I think it is still good opportunity to get perspective on things, to learn what matters to me and what doesn't. This is what I find the most powerful thing in the end: as the change in perception seems binary, and seems quite well defined so that it is repeatable, I can calibrate my perception with the transition, get more conscious about sound.

 

[Waxx]

In my experience, any woofer (not subwoofer) bigger than 12" is often to wide for a small (european style size) living room, a 10" is the best balance between dynamics and dispertion/throw for woofers. And with compression drivers don't take the very wide dispertion horns, the 60x40 throw is actually best.

I've been fiddling arround with diy designs actually and think i got the best results with a 12" woofer (Beyma 12BR70 originally, but a Faital 12RS340, a recent model would even be better. The cabinet will be big (about 90L internal) but it could give clean (before running out of xmax) bass on simulations to about 115dB (so a lot of headroom) at 30hz, and it can be crossed at about 800Hz LR4 or higher. Couple that with a big horn with dispertion of 50-60° horizontal, and wide vertical tuned to 500Hz or so (Faital LTH142 for instance) and a compression driver that can go low enough. For that the FaitalPRO HF140 or HF143 would work, don't worry about the recommended crossover freq, that is on full power, not the power you will use. Combine that with dsp crossing at 8 a 900Hz and suitable amps and you can have a system that beats most commercial hifi if you do it right. The trick is to do it right (not that easy). Speaker driver models are just models i know, i'm sure many others may be suited...

You could also go 3 way off course, many do, but it's less needed than with hifi drivers to have good quality on high volume. A bit like the big JBL monitors, but diy and for a fraction of the price. You can go bigger, but those tend to work best in bigger rooms. A very well known diy example is the Calpamos design by Humble Home Hifi, using a 15BR400 woofer and a Faital HF201-8 compression driver in a JBL 2380 horn (or clone like the Psound horn they recommend). I don't know if their passive crossover is good, but i did hear an active version of it (with a MiniDSP flex and Ncore amps) and it was as i remember the big JBL M2's that I installed in a room for someone a few years ago.

But standard PA speakers, no, they mostly don't do it right in those spaces. They are build for big spaces with different dispertion and throw.

 

[ChrisG]

In general, I think PA-style speakers can/do have their place in domestic audio. I use compression drivers in my current home HiFi setup. I like the power handling and controlled directivity compared to traditional dome tweeters. At any sensible level, distortion above 1kHz is vanishingly low.
When it comes to LF reproduction, conventional 2-way PA speakers usually have plenty of "slam" (70-150Hz). Most PA "subwoofers" will extend that to 50, maybe 40Hz. Some subwoofers go to 30Hz or below, but they're the exception rather than the rule: every octave of extension requires 4x the volume of air moved, and when you start to consider how many trucks are required to put on a show, shooting for the extra extension becomes financially troubling.

Yes, EV apparently put waveguides on the full range drivers to widen the dispersion…works quite well from what I can tell from walking around the speaker while listening.
I have just the one unfortunately, so any comparisons I have done with with my other speakers is only in mono. This EV has a fun factor(?) to the sound that makes it very pleasant to listen to. If I turn the bass down 3-4 db (it has rudimentary eq on it’s app) I can make it sound quite similar to a single 8361 playing mono, but it sounds maybe more lush? I’d imagine a stereo pair would sound quite acceptable but being 7’ tall might disqualify it for most domestic spaces lol. It makes a helluva bluetooth speaker though!
I thought about buying another one to have a pair to rent out, just not sure I want get into that.

I'm afraid I can't agree with your impressions of the EV. I found the (rough) treble had a weird phasey quality as you move around. A quick glance at the published frequency response shows what I'm talking about. It ain't pretty.


Chris

 

[Flaesh]

I didn't buy the 4622, in part because of lousy logistics about 13 years ago. Although in general the JBL 4722 is a quite suitable home loudspeaker.
And here is 4722:

I guess Mitch Barnett aka @mitchco needs no introduction.

 

[Duke]

... a Faital 12RS340, a recent model would even be better. The cabinet will be big (about 90L internal) but it could give clean (before running out of xmax) bass on simulations to about 115dB (so a lot of headroom) at 30hz, and it can be crossed at about 800Hz LR4 or higher. Couple that with a big horn...

Yup.

(Did you mean 12RS430?)

 

[Flaesh]

At a friend's attic, F215+ :

https://www-audionet-com-tw.transla..._sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=fr&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp, JBL C222 :

 

[GXAlan]

JBL C222 :
View attachment 344109