Shouldn’t we be looking more at PA speakers?

[GXAlan]

But....and it is a big but, do you want those speakers in your room?

No.but there is is where I can imagine some sort of fancy looking fabric cover. The classic Vandersteen speakers look fine with their sock, but they they are ugly with the sock off. You could imagine a B&O level kind of fabric scultpure.

I think horns can do this at a greater listening distance. I think this explains why horns can be so seductive, despite having less than flat response. If you require an objective attribute of speakers that eludes measurement, it might be near field effect.

Everything can be measured but the “preference score” computation may need to be adjusted.

It could be some variation of direct vs reflected sound. Amir has mentioned in a post somewhere that the dynamics/ability to go loud without compression is unique even against his Salon2 (but he listens to music loudly).

One aspect of Magnepan which is not measured commonly but easily measurable is that the line source results in a volume drop off that more closely follows 1/r instead of 1/r2. In big rooms with Magnepan’s playing background music during a cocktail party, you can hear the music far away but your conversation near the speaker isn’t drowned out by the music…

 

[Petrushka]

No.but there is is where I can imagine some sort of fancy looking fabric cover. The classic Vandersteen speakers look fine with their sock, but they they are ugly with the sock off. You could imagine a B&O level kind of fabric scultpure.



Everything can be measured but the “preference score” computation may need to be adjusted.

It could be some variation of direct vs reflected sound. Amir has mentioned in a post somewhere that the dynamics/ability to go loud without compression is unique even against his Salon2 (but he listens to music loudly).

One aspect of Magnepan which is not measured commonly but easily measurable is that the line source results in a volume drop off that more closely follows 1/r instead of 1/r2. In big rooms with Magnepan’s playing background music during a cocktail party, you can hear the music far away but your conversation near the speaker isn’t drowned out by the music…

You are confirming that there are objective attributes of speakers that are in theory measurable, but cannot easily be correlated with subjective preference.

Room here for some original thinking.

 

[Digby]

No.but there is is where I can imagine some sort of fancy looking fabric cover. The classic Vandersteen speakers look fine with their sock, but they they are ugly with the sock off. You could imagine a B&O level kind of fabric scultpure.

or perhaps corner horns, I saw pictures of someone of here that had there own DIY ones of those. Painted white they seemed to blend into the room quite nicely.

 

[hex168]

Yes, I find much of that users opinions on this matter dated.

I have a pair of PA two ways, they are DIY, the VBS 10.2 loudspeaker from MTG-Designs. They are basically just loud studio monitors with exceptional rendering of audio, albiet a bit more narrow than I'm used to, spacing them out a bit more than my wider speakers seemed to help.

MTG Designs - VBS-10.2

Design description and goals: Bigger Brother to the VBS-6.2 this is another design that delivers a very high level of bang for your buck. A 10" 2-way with a horn loaded compression driver that does not sacrifice sound quality in its ability to deliver high output for very reasonable costs. Ideally

www.mtg-designs.com

There's not much to say about them that can't be said for any good neutral speakers. They have quite exceptional clarity and easily the best vocal layer seperating that I have personally heard. However, and IDK how much sighted bias plays into this, but it's hard to shake that I'm listening to a horn. They don't really sound like they integrate with my room at all, there is a noticable lack of room reflections compared to my other stuff. I put them away for awhile but I'm getting them out again because I want to play some stuff loud again Keeping in mind I'm super picky with speakers and will call out anything that bothers me at all, I doubt most people would care about what I consider my only complaint.

Suffice to say I don't think my speakers here are typical pa speakers, the performance seen and heard is better than most PA speakers I've heard, and I've heard a lot as I worked in live sound for awhile.

Three suggestions that could help with your "problem." Trying the last one is free.
1) https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...aveguided-speaker-combined.27988/#post-969627
2) Look at Duke's work on rear-facing supplementation to horn speakers for acoustically delayed reflections
3) Toe-in crossing in front of the listener, per Geddes.

 

[Ktacos]

I think my issues are just inherent to the type of speaker it is, I've tried numerous things but nothing really fixes it, it's fairly minor anyway. I think in general i think some peoples brains are just sensitive to loading a driver deep into a horn waveguide.

 

[tmuikku]

I accidentally discovered near field by using some decent but not great bookshelf speakers as computer speakers while digitizing vinyl. All I required of them was strong highs to expose surface noise, but what I got was something close to a headphone effect. Quite mesmerizing.

I think horns can do this at a greater listening distance. I think this explains why horns can be so seductive, despite having less than flat response. If you require an objective attribute of speakers that eludes measurement, it might be near field effect

yes, I think almost any speaker should in almost any room, just setup small enough listening triangle. What happens is the auditory system sort of locks in to the direct sound, and now there is engagement and clarity, better localization and even envelopment, where sound ia not just in front but almost like being inside the sound. It is radically different stereo sound perceptually, than listening further away where brsin doesn't lock in and it's just sound somewhere in front, bit hazy kind of sound perceptually. See David Griesinger studies about Proximity and Limit of Localization Distance.

Important here is that it seems brain either locks in or doesn't and there is not much sliding between so it's quite distinct and reliable on/off event in auditory system, relatively easy to perceive, which kind of reveals how much effect/proceasing our auditory system does and that it is very much part of how any stereo system (or any sounds) are perceived eventually.

Now that you are aware of the phenomenon I strongly suggest you to find at which listening distance you perceptually lose the "nearfield" sound. Move yourself back and forth physically to learn how the transition sounds and you can now find the transition with almost any speakers in any room, or with any sound source like person talking to you. The trasition between the two perceptual sounds is like a beacon, a thing you can always find no matter what you listen to so you can now root/base your perception even if the speakers or the room was previously unheard. This is because the transition is not the speaker or room sound changing, but your own brain processing it all differently, the brain we always carry to any situation. Using the transition ( auditory system switching state ) enables use of logic with the perception, you can do A/B testing with listening triangle position related issues by simply moving back and forth around the trasition, listen for how the speaker(s) work with the room as the effect almost mutes early reflections from perception for example. Anyway, I think listening skill makes huge step forward playing around with the transition. You'll learn that some recordings sound better listened closer than transition, some beyond, and some work on both, which reveals what the mixing engineer was likely listening to, the direct sound or their local room influenced sound, reducing circle of confusion a bit. Knowing where the transition with any setup enables you to listen either sound at will, with involuntary attention from brain, or not, just by changing listening distance a bit. This is huge advantage for you the listener as you can now gravitate toward which ever sounds better at the moment, involved or relaxing sound, and optimize your system not for one good sweetspot but for two!

 

[tmuikku]

You are confirming that there are objective attributes of speakers that are in theory measurable, but cannot easily be correlated with subjective preference.

Room here for some original thinking.

With the preference score of speakera there is still the room and (unconscious) auditory system before the perception in your consciousness. The missing link that is not present in the preference score is to understand relationship of the speakers and the room, and auditory system, at some reliable way so you understand what you perceive connects with written concepts like the preferemce score or speaker DI.

The transition I touched on previous post is the reliable way in my opinion, which unlocks the situation like so: your own auditory system state is now known, because you know which side of the transition you are now listening, so only unknown is the speaker room interaction, which you can now AB test by moving a little to switch auditory system state at will. Change speaker positioning or toe-in, find at which distance the transition happens, listen for envelopment (or whatever you want to concentrate on) by switching it on or off from perception by moving a little. Iterate until happy, with whatever it was you tried to adjust for better. For example, practicing this for a while you could come up with an idea how well the speaker DI serves your purpose in your room, and then do something about it, get more suoted speakers if necessary, or be happy and bot lust for other speakers for no good reason. Most importantly you now have connected your perception to your system and understand connection between perception and written concepts better, like the preference score. Obviously having a goal is prerequisite to make actual progress with your system, so now you are on to something real to you.

This might seem far fetched stuff, but if you check out Griesinger papers it makes sense,at least to me. I think Griesinger papers work as a map, what you can or cannot perceive either side of the transition. Griesinger calls the transition "limit of localization distance". Although his work revolves around concert halls I think the same phenomenon happens here with speakers, as it really is about the auditory system and not any specific sound source or environment. This really opens the path to develop listening skill, and your stereo system with it.

 

[Petrushka]

With the preference score of speakera there is still the room and (unconscious) auditory system before the perception in your consciousness. The missing link that is not present in the preference score is to understand relationship of the speakers and the room, and auditory system, at some reliable way so you understand what you perceive and can tune the relationship to what you think it should be.

The transition I touched on previous post is the reliable way in my opinion, which unlocks the situation like so: your own auditory system state is now known, because you know which side of the transition you are now listening, so all is left is the speaker room interaction, which you can now AB test by moving a little to switch auditory system state at will. Change speaker positioning or toe-in, find at which distance the transition happens, listen for envelopment (or whatever you want to concentrate on) by switching it on or off from perception by moving a little. This might seem far fetched stuff, but if you check out Griesinger papers it makes sense,at least to me. I think Griesinger papers work as a map, what you can or cannot perceive either side of the transition. Griesinger calls the transition "limit of localization distance". Although his work revolves around concert halls I think the same phenomenon happens here with speakers, as it really is about the auditory system and not any specific sound source or environment.

Flat response is always a desirable trait, but I find the near field experience to be more emotionally involving than distant listening, surround sound, or headphones.

When I was converting vinyl and healing various defects, I could feel, viscerally, the defects. They floated at some distance from the music. There were older recordings where I could sense the HVAC system in the recording hall. This sense of isolation made it possible to determine when noise reduction was too aggressive.

I got into an argument with someone who claimed that click an pop removal always left an audible thump. That may be true with automatic settings, but I found you could always find a way that left no audible trace. This was probably pointless, but it was a hobby, so fun.

 

[tmuikku]

Yeah, you have set your auditory system state by having a nearfield setup and seem to highly value it, for tge task at least. This is not part of concepts like preference score or flat response, it is not property of your speakers but property of yourself. It is really fun to listen close enough like so.

Example drawn from your usecase: if one must do similar work you are doing, it would be important to get into "nearfield", in other words know which side the transition one is listening to know whether your auditory system supports what you need to be listen for, or preventa you hearing it making bad adjustements. Or simply, if you want to feel the sound viscerally, then get closer than the transition.

 

[dasdoing]

Well, the wedding is over and done. It was outdoors at my recreational property. I used a single Evolve 50 for the cellist and the dance (~120 guests) . My nearest neighbours are about 750m away and we STILL had a noise complaint, lol. I guess it’s not a party untill the cops show up! The EV worked perfect and everyone was happy with the sound, so a success I guess.

hahaha. I love this. power to the people

 

[Ktacos]

When my buddies I had in my 20's were building speakers nonstop, we'd host events in the country at one our houses, but still near other houses. It was cops every time even though we talked to neighbors, gave them our phone number to call us if they want us to turn it down/off. We always went with a hard 10p.m. cut off time, or at least turn the subs off and the tops down for a campfire levels.

Then we got smart and started to get permits. Boy were the neighbors pissed when they realized we were allowed to go until 11 p.m. with no restrictions. The lesson here is that people suck.