It would be interesting to hear your comparisons of finalizing the designs of the Manta vs the SBS.1. What effects did the cardioid behavior have on how well you were able to get the sound and the measurements to be where you wanted? In theory, I would think that the cardioid speaker would be easier since there are fewer "stray" effects to consider. However, I know from watching your posts, you spent a TON of time on the Manta -- I am guessing a lot more than the SBS.1 (but I don't know). If so, was that time spent on getting the cardioid behavior correct?
On a related note, do think the Manta's are easier to place or fit into "real world" rooms than the SBS.1? Have you had enough experience with both to have an opinion?
(Note, I am trying to compare "traditional" vs. cardioid speakers here and I thought your experiences in having done one of each would be illuminating. The discussion doesn't have to be limited to those two speakers.)
Thank you for an interesting (set of) questions! I have several threads oriented around the development of our products on ASR, which is mostly a good thing - but questions like this makes me want to crosspost.
I am also not sure how to make this a short answer. I'll try to break it up a bit:
Some context #1: Measurements
Some seem to think designing speakers is mostly about getting it to measure well. But it's a bit more complicated than that. So when you ask "how I am able to get the measurements to be where I wanted", that's sort of the wrong question. In isolation I don't want the measurements to be anywhere, I want it to sound right. Then we of course know that those are interconnected. But I can have a very good sounding speaker with measurements I know will cause some reaction here on ASR (the 1-2khz dip on the Manta is a good example). And then it sometimes is about looking if it's possible to improve the measurements mainly to improve the optics. So suddenly it's not "how can I make this measure and sound better", it's "how can I make this measure better without sounding worse?" - which is a weird side effect on the newfound focus on measurements.
Some context #2: Why I built the Manta
The Manta was intentionally built and designed to be an end state, over the top product. For most domestic, living room situations, the Manta is too much of everything. Designwise there's a lot going on, and from a capacity perspective it's just ridiculous. And it sounds fantastic. It was built to get attention to the brand, and to hopefully have a trickle down effect with regards to interest in the SBS.1, which looks very neutral in comparison. The SBS.1 has a bit of a problem: It looks like it should cost way less than it does, and it sounds like it should cost way more than it does.
Development time SBS.1 vs Manta:
The SBS.1 had a development time from the first prototype until it could be purchased by customers of around 8-9 months
The Manta had a development time from the first prototype until it could be purchased by customers of around 18 months.
Is it easier or harder to build a cardioid speaker, and why? What took so long with the Manta?
My speakers tend to sound very good very quick, and then it takes forever to make them perfect. It's also hard to leave good enough alone. The SBS.1 has had a couple of iterations in the tuning after they were released, but I doubt anyone but me could tell the difference in the sound.
With the Manta it was also supposed to be a statement speaker for the brand, so it was very important that it sounded awesome. And yes, getting the cardioid right takes a lot of time and experimentation. The Manta is also less "perfect" from a measurement standpoint, which means listening and experimenting with compromises from that standpoint took quite a while as well. Testing speakers in different rooms over time also takes time, to ensure that the tuning is general enough to work well across rooms (sizes, more or less damped, etc). This was of course also extra complicated with a cardioid approach, since good performance in-room was a key feature. But we're now at a point where I can recognize the general response (both when I look at the measurements and listen to the speaker) of the Manta across very different rooms, so that's a very good sign that it's right.
Finally, two of the signature qualities of the Manta are soundstage and envelopment, and these are qualities that cannot be measured directly, so that's also an added bit of complexity.
Was that (extra) time spent on getting the cardioid behavior correct?
The cardioid effect from the perspective of finalizing the cardioid system design (the actual enclosure) took about one year of iterations (calendar time, it could have been done faster). Most of that time was not spent just doing that of course, but that's when the design stabilized. This part is mostly about experimenting and measuring the effect, not so much listening.
In the regular listening and tuning sessions, my mind isn't going "Is the cardioid effect working", it's more "does it sound right", regardless of the cardioid feature as such.
Are the Mantas (or cardioid speakers in general) easier to place in rooms than traditional speakers?
Without a shred of doubt. Case in point, the
new cardioid floorstanders I'm working on are currently in my living room, where I normally have the SBS.1. Those prototypes already have inherent qualities that the SBS.1 doesn't have. They sound larger, the soundstage is wider, clarity is improved. And the SBS.1 are GREAT sounding speakers in their own right. And it's a pretty good comparison since all these speakers use the
same coax driver, which pretty much rules out that the difference is due to something other than the cardioid.
The floorstander prototypes are also interesting because they are only cardioid down to around 200hz. Most focus on cardioid behaviour in the upper bass / lower mid area, but I would argue it's an extremely satisfying effect in the midrange as well.
Through the development of the SBS.1 and the Manta I have fallen completely in love with coax drivers, and I have fallen completely in love with cardioid speakers.
I hope that answered some of what you were asking, please feel free to add follow up questions
shivaudyo.com
