Speakers Playing "Big" when needed...

[FrantzM]

Hi

I had to open this thread because of this subject very close to my heart....

I have always been attracted to physically big speakers. It seems to me that small speakers (bookshelf-types) present a version of reality that is lacking in the sense of size. I do not have any explanation nor have I seen much research or studies of it. My contention at this point in time physically small speakers even when helped by appropriate subwoofers tend to sound smaller than their larger brethrens even at moderate listening levels.

Why is that?
Is this a psychological factor: The speaker being big then the eyes/brain perceive the sound coming from it as "big"?
Or is it bass extension ( not sure here, see the point of small satellite + subs)
Is this always true?
Is this real?

Or is it one of those audiophiles fairy tales: By changing the Cat 5 cable to the femto clock on my 3-piece stack DAC with a Cat 77 (superior in all ways to all Cat 5,6,7,8, etc) , I perceived more air between the instruments and a more organic representation )

Let the discussion begin

 

[Cosmik]

I share your predilection for large speakers. A large box naturally behaves differently from a small box, and most speakers are simply designed passively around the box, perpetuating the 'large speaker sound' phenomenon. It is real.

Electronics, however, can render the box merely 'the thing that captures the rear wave', and can modify the characteristics of driver displacement, so until proven otherwise I am prepared to believe that active electronics can be a substitute for size - particularly these cardioid doodahs.

Aesthetically I remain in the 1970s, and would happily have a pair of KEF 105.2s in my living room (maybe I will make them my next 'DSP activation' project...)

 

[Thomas Savage]

I share your predilection for large speakers. A large box naturally behaves differently from a small box, and most speakers are simply designed passively around the box, perpetuating the 'large speaker sound' phenomenon. It is real.

Electronics, however, can render the box merely 'the thing that captures the rear wave', and can modify the characteristics of driver displacement, so until proven otherwise I am prepared to believe that active electronics can be a substitute for size - particularly these cardioid doodahs.

Aesthetically I remain in the 1970s, and would happily have a pair of KEF 105.2s in my living room (maybe I will make them my next 'DSP activation' project...)

You will be loving your Franz Ferdinand on those ‘Cosmik ‘ kef’s.

 

[FrantzM]

I share your predilection for large speakers. A large box naturally behaves differently from a small box, and most speakers are simply designed passively around the box, perpetuating the 'large speaker sound' phenomenon. It is real.

Electronics, however, can render the box merely 'the thing that captures the rear wave', and can modify the characteristics of driver displacement, so until proven otherwise I am prepared to believe that active electronics can be a substitute for size - particularly these cardioid doodahs.

Aesthetically I remain in the 1970s, and would happily have a pair of KEF 105.2s in my living room (maybe I will make them my next 'DSP activation' project...)

I am one of thsoe who believes in Electronics.. Believe me ... Yet in order for electronics /DSP/Computer to act they need to knwo what to act on. On that I am not aware about the research on that factor: "Bigness" ...
I have yet to hear a small speaker with subwoofers who will make me believe that I am listening to a Duntech Sovereign or a Magico Q5 or a Revel Salon 2 or any big speaker you care to name.. if you are going in the way of horns , let's say an olf Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipsch Jubilee .. all bets are off .. No small speakers need apply even with several 8 inchers (or so I think, i could be wrong ;0)
Now I don't want to think inside a box : It is not an issue or passive vs active... There is something else going one. Perhaps electronics can take care of "it" but "it" needs to be clearly and unequivocally identified. I don't know at this juncture

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

What does "big" mean in this context? I realize audio and sound qualities are extremely difficult to describe with any exactitude. I think I sorta know what you mean, but, then again, my interpretation may be different from yours.

And, yes, as you have said, visual cues may play a very large role in the perception.

Also, of course, ideally we want speakers that play "big" or "small" as appropriate to the recording.

 

[oivavoi]

Like I wrote in the D&D thread, I also have this impression that larger speakers with a larger radiating surface area sound different - in a good way. And I think this is one of the areas of speaker design which is insufficiently understood and quantified. OR it may be about visual bias, that are our eyes give our brain cues about what to expect.

To reiterate, these are the factors I think may possibly be involved, if it's something objective:

- dynamics (SPL capacity)
- bass extension
- ability to go loud without distorting
- directionality of the speakers
- the size of the radiating surface area of the speaker/baffle (can it have an impact beyond the directionality of the sound waves generated?)
- sound intensity (and particle velocity?)

The first points are not mystical. We can all agree that bass extension and dynamics (the ability to go loud) can make a difference. But the last bullet point is a bit mystical. My experience is that direct sound has a different "feel" compared to indirect or reflected sound, even though the SPL may be the same. I have understood that sound waves can be described not only through "sound pressure", but also through "sound intensity" and "particle velocity". I really don't understand the technicalities here, but I've seen some horn guys suggest that this is part of the reason why large horns feel different, that horns and/or larger radiating surfaces create sound waves with a sound intensity/particle velocity that is different.

My apologies if this is just mumbo jumbo. This is way beyond my technical paygrade. It's a humble attempt at making sense of what my ears seem to tell me.

 

[watchnerd]

Hi

I had to open this thread because of this subject very close to my heart....

I have always been attracted to physically big speakers. It seems to me that small speakers (bookshelf-types) present a version of reality that is lacking in the sense of size. I do not have any explanation nor have I seen much research or studies of it. My contention at this point in time physically small speakers even when helped by appropriate subwoofers tend to sound smaller than their larger brethrens even at moderate listening levels.

Why is that?
Is this a psychological factor: The speaker being big then the eyes/brain perceive the sound coming from it as "big"?
Or is it bass extension ( not sure here, see the point of small satellite + subs)
Is this always true?
Is this real?

Or is it one of those audiophiles fairy tales: By changing the Cat 5 cable to the femto clock on my 3-piece stack DAC with a Cat 77 (superior in all ways to all Cat 5,6,7,8, etc) , I perceived more air between the instruments and a more organic representation )

Let the discussion begin

Yes, displacement matters.

Large scale music, especially symphonic, requires the ability to move a lot of air.

That being said, there are multiple ways to achieve displacement.

A big ass motor, with large xMax voicecoil, lower Fs, lower sensitivity, and a farkton of watts can put out pretty amazing SPLs in a box of ~20 liters down to about 40-50 Hz. ATC is probably the most famous for this approach, with Dynaudio also following this school. My Dynaudio Contour 20s can be driven much louder with lower distortion than bigger speakers I've owned....but they're also $5000 for 2-way, stand-mount speakers (add another $1000 for the suped-up stands I use), and the pairing electronics are $15k. So it ain't cheap.

Could I have more SPLs with a set of larger JBL 4367's? Sure.

But once I can hit 95-100dB peaks low distortion at the listening position, I'm pretty happy.

As for the deepest bass, that's what subs are for.

And, for me, since half my listening is via LP, the deepest bass barely matters as it doesn't really exist on vinyl.

 

[amirm]

Other than agreeing with you Frantz, I don't have a whole lot to add. I listen to hundreds of systems at shows and that rule that bigger speaker projects a bigger image/impression is almost always true.

One side observation is that horns seem to radiate larger than their size implies.

 

[iridium]

I prefer Big & Beautiful TONE = 12" paper cones [or horns] over any cone that is aluminum, kevlar, titanium, etc. [beryllium driver in a horn is Excellent].

iridium.

 

[Cosmik]

I want a system to be able to reproduce the sound of a large empty space, and in order to do this it needs the bass to go all the way down cleanly. It isn't a separate 'effect', but is part of an integrated sound that I rarely hear. I think people were more interested in achieving it in the 70s and 80s than they are now.

 

[Dialectic]

I am one of thsoe who believes in Electronics.. Believe me ... Yet in order for electronics /DSP/Computer to act they need to knwo what to act on. On that I am not aware about the research on that factor: "Bigness" ...
I have yet to hear a small speaker with subwoofers who will make me believe that I am listening to a Duntech Sovereign or a Magico Q5 or a Revel Salon 2 or any big speaker you care to name.. if you are going in the way of horns , let's say an olf Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipsch Jubilee .. all bets are off .. No small speakers need apply even with several 8 inchers (or so I think, i could be wrong ;0)
Now I don't want to think inside a box : It is not an issue or passive vs active... There is something else going one. Perhaps electronics can take care of "it" but "it" needs to be clearly and unequivocally identified. I don't know at this juncture

Dutch & Dutch 8C. The Kii Threes also do it, but they run out of steam in the bass at high SPLs.

 

[amirm]

The Kii Threes also do it, but they run out of steam in the bass at high SPLs.

The Kii's can sound loud but to me they still sound somewhat small like a bookshelf speaker.

 

[Thomas Savage]

So we don’t have much scientific meat on the bone wrt the original inquiry that inspired this thread..

 

[Wombat]

A basic explanation:

https://ohmspeaker.com/news/big-woofers-give-better-bass-maybe/

Darn you, Hoffman.

 

[RayDunzl]

So we don’t have much scientific meat on the bone wrt the original inquiry that inspired this thread..

Nope.

I listened for "bigness" between the little JBL and the not-so-little MartinLogans.

At the sweet spot, there's a definite difference in presentation (ML wins), but the sensation didn't register as a particular difference in size, to me.

It might be because the JBLs are up high, woofer about the same height as the center of the panels. The tweeter is 58 inches off the floor.

 

[Sal1950]

if you are going in the way of horns , let's say an olf Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipsch Jubilee .. all bets are off .. No small speakers need apply even with several 8 inchers (or so I think, i could be wrong ;0)

I bought my Klipsch LaScala's new in 1978 and over the next 32 years they lived in my home. In that time I went thru a couple of driver/crossover updates along with changes in both SS and tube amp power. I went and listened to everything the audiophile market had to offer over all those years, living in the Chicago inner city allowed me access to all the high end dealers any time I was interested.
That being said, yes, I heard the things the La Scala's didn't do well, BUT when push came to shove, nothing I heard had that "big" sound, the incredible soundstage they put up along with that "live" something. A presence that sounded more like real instruments, a ability to breath with ease from the softest to loudest, micro/macro dynamics. I'd have them today if they fit in my retirement digs.
Maybe it is all a optical illusion but there's something about the dynamics of large horns that will spoil some for no other..

 

[Wombat]

Large LF drivers(generally 15 inch) with relatively lightweight cones and high BiL motors were developed in the '30s and '40s in concert(no pun) with horns to give controlled directivity, low distortion and clarity to vocals in small to large performance spaces. These systems also had to be efficient due to the cost of amplification at the time.

There is something about this sound that makes smaller systems sound constrained, to me, at similar sound levels.

 

[Cosmik]

So we don’t have much scientific meat on the bone wrt the original inquiry that inspired this thread..

No one has shown that you can't have 'big' size from a small box. If they imply it, it is because they are talking about:
(a) their experience over the years with passive speakers where undoubtedly a big box means more and deeper bass, and less cone displacement giving better linearity
(b) the wide baffle gives a lower baffle step frequency
So there are genuine reasons for 'bigness' of sound in the passive world.

But, a small box can give prodigious amounts of deep bass if driven with enough power:

Overall, I would have to say that I doubt that any conventional design would be as compact, or would have such clarity and solidarity. Being a sealed box, there is none of the "waffle" that ported designs often give, and the speaker is protected against excessive excursion by the air pressure in the box itself (below the cutoff frequency, anyway).

The bottom end in my system is now staggering. It is rock solid, and absolutely thunders when called upon. The 400W amp is more than sufficient for the job,
Given the performance, I would never consider a conventional sub again...

And the dispersion effects of extra baffle width can be synthesised from multiple drivers and/or acoustic vents. DSP can give you perfectly aligned phase and timing. Motion feedback can give you perfect linearity.

If measurements/simulations show that the Kii Three et al. achieve the same bass output and dispersion characteristics as a large speaker then surely that is all the science you need? Unless there is something magical that measurements can't capture but audiophiles can hear..?

 

[Wombat]

Ideally a loudspeaker can be made small and be somewhat similar in performance to a big one.

However, the efficiency loss due to size reduction has to be compensated for by very-much increased drive power(easy) and Xmax(not so easy with low distortion). One can DSP until the cows come home but in the end the laws of thermodynamics/applied mechanics/applied electricity hold true as does the requirement of the small speaker(and enclosure) to accordingly withstand the much greater forces(especially cone control/performance) and heat it is subjected too. Pumping loads of power into small-speaker's necessarily very big(electro-magnetically) motors also requires sophisticated heat dissipation techniques, including getting the heat out of the small enclosure, to avoid thermal compression of the driver.
Then there is the small baffle.

Simple idealistic thinking is somewhat of an indulgence compared to the reality of getting ideas to work in the real world.

 

[Cosmik]

Ideally a loudspeaker can be made small and be somewhat similar in performance to a big one.

However, the efficiency loss due to size reduction has to be compensated for by very-much increased drive power(easy) and Xmax(not so easy with low distortion). One can DSP until the cows come home but in the end the laws of thermodynamics/applied mechanics/applied electricity hold true as does the requirement of the small speaker(and enclosure) to accordingly withstand the much greater forces(especially cone control/performance) and heat it is subjected too. Pumping loads of power into small-speaker's necessarily very big(electro-magnetically) motors also requires sophisticated heat dissipation techniques, including getting the heat out of the small enclosure, to avoid thermal compression of the driver.
Then there is the small baffle.

Simple idealistic thinking is somewhat of an indulgence compared to the reality of getting ideas to work in the real world.

All true, I'm sure, but that doesn't stop people from actually creating tiny speakers that produce lots of bass (even a DIY-er like Rod Elliott who explains it all in great detail). The Devialet Phantom is obviously an extreme(-ly silly) example.

Personally, I like big speakers and big boxes. My speaker with a 12" woofer and huge enclosure is just driven 'as-is' and allowed to roll off on its own. My smaller speakers with 8" drivers are augmented with some EQ to achieve a similar roll-off. They sound great, but the 12" speakers sound different because, I imagine:

1. They are more linear in their cone displacement
2. The baffles are wider

If I really, really wanted to, I could probably widen the baffles or do some Kii-style multiple driver stuff. And I could add some motion-sensing feedback or feedforward pre-distortion using neural nets or similar. It would work; I just don't think there's any mystery here.