Speakers that produce astonishing soundstaging/imaging?

[Thomas_A]

but clearly worse than actual zero diffraction concept. That kind of simplified studies don't reveal all multi-source effects. Just how overall directivity and response deviations look as few frequency responses. Audible differences can be quite surprising.

Do you have studies that do?

 

[kimmosto]

Do you have studies that do?

No. Last March...April I designed seven different half space i.e. flush-mounted wall speakers. Very basic vented 2-ways with separate 5"+1" drivers without separate WG and one coaxial too. Fitting of test baffle to wall was far from perfect with small step, but still that concept is significantly better than conventional small box speaker in almost everything. Especially in dynamics and spatial quality including tolerance to listening distance and geometry. Any distance from zero (head between the speakers) to at least 5 meters works - as well as different listening elevations so edgeless concept partly attenuates also severe lobing effects.
Waveguides, bevels, roundings and rounded bevels have been in my cookbook for few decades, but edgeless concept caused small reboot in my brain.

 

[tmuikku]

kimmosto, how do you like imaging/soundstage (depth) and adjectives like that with your on-wall speakers? is it myth that to have stereo image depth the speaker needs to be away from the wall(s) or is it just people listening with their visual cortex?

I mean its certainly true that if a speaker was designed for full space use then it doesn't sound optimal backed against wall, but when the speaker is designed to be on-wall it should sound right, right?

 

[Thomas_A]

No. Last March...April I designed seven different half space i.e. flush-mounted wall speakers. Very basic vented 2-ways with separate 5"+1" drivers without separate WG and one coaxial too. Fitting of test baffle to wall was far from perfect with small step, but still that concept is significantly better than conventional small box speaker in almost everything. Especially in dynamics and spatial quality including tolerance to listening distance and geometry. Any distance from zero (head between the speakers) to at least 5 meters works - as well as different listening elevations so edgeless concept partly attenuates also severe lobing effects.
Waveguides, bevels, roundings and rounded bevels have been in my cookbook for few decades, but edgeless concept caused small reboot in my brain.

Ok. All my DIY speakers are designed for on/at-wall position. An edge-less design was not in my book, but care to reduce any early peaks or dips due to diffraction effects.

 

[gino1961]

^Felt and towels can have some effect but is very little / tricky to adjust and a marketing tool at best....

this speaker is intended for recording engineers ... i think they have well trained ears and dont follow the market

https://digitalaudioservice.com/media/catalog/product/cache/700x700/lipinski-sound-l-707a-(active).jpg

i would love to see some H e V dispersion measurement of speakers of this kind
Especially in not treated rooms they can tame some side walls and ceiling reflections Reflections are the worst enemy of soundstage imho
An interview to the designer

Taken from the web https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/felt-or-foam-walled-waveguide.205249/

Having successfully tamed the sometimes bright response of the Scanspeak HDS tweeter using a thick elliptical wool-felt ring has perked my interest in the idea of using foam or felt waveguides.
Lipinski uses such a device in their Sound 707 speaker and the measurements indicate that it works quite well at controlling dispersion and improving decay times. I think the latter has to do with the absorption effect of the acoustic foam walls.

 

[tmuikku]

Well yeah, I bet my old hat that if the felt was replaced with a good waveguide the responses would be cleaner and show less diffraction (and reflection in this case) secondary sound source related interference, ripple. Why didn't they make waveguide from the felt but used the stairsteps? In this sense it looks to my eye as marketing, differentiation from the competitors. Of course I have no idea how it sounds and probably sounds just fine, perhaps better than with a waveguide who knows, so take my words as you like

Lipinski Sound L-707 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I estimated the Lipinski L-707's voltage sensitivity at a high 90.3dB(B)/2.83V/m, which is to specification. However, the speaker drops below 4 ohms in the lower midrange and upper treble, reaching a minimum value of 3.35 ohms at 180Hz (fig.1). There is also a relatively...

www.stereophile.com

 

[gino1961]

Well yeah, I bet my old hat that if the felt was replaced with a good waveguide the responses would be cleaner and show less diffraction (and reflection in this case) secondary sound source related interference, ripple. Why didn't they make waveguide from the felt but used the stairsteps? In this sense it looks to my eye as marketing, differentiation from the competitors. Of course I have no idea how it sounds and probably sounds just fine, so take my words as you like, perhaps worse with a waveguide who knows

Lipinski Sound L-707 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I estimated the Lipinski L-707's voltage sensitivity at a high 90.3dB(B)/2.83V/m, which is to specification. However, the speaker drops below 4 ohms in the lower midrange and upper treble, reaching a minimum value of 3.35 ohms at 180Hz (fig.1). There is also a relatively...

www.stereophile.com

Hi i also like waveguides better ... but waveguides do not absorb sound I think the physics are a little different maybe ?
i am very interested in any way to limit H and V dispersion because i would like to treat only the wall behind the listening spot
but the ceiling and side walls are untouchable
For instance the speakers that i like overall better in my room where Tannoy DC ... where the woofer cone limits the tweeter dispersion
I have 2 8" DC drivers (one paper one plastic) for a possible 2 way and one 6" DC drivers plastic for a possible 3 way
Cannibalized from models dc100, 609 and 623 ( I tend to cannibalize vintage speakers to save on drivers )

 

[kimmosto]

kimmosto, how do you like imaging/soundstage (depth) and adjectives like that with your on-wall speakers? is it myth that to have stereo image depth the speaker needs to be away from the wall(s) or is it just people listening with their visual cortex?

I don't care much increased depth further from the speakers generated by combination of rear-radiating polar pattern and room. Maybe my "problem" is that I don't like the way dipoles create depth because it initiates flutter echo reducing resolution where this feature is fully utilized i.e. front wall is reflecting but not with diffusers. In-wall and properly rounded close-wall concept with low directivity radiators in a good acoustics creates logical, stable and room filling kind of sound stage. More like "they are here close to front wall while I'm close to rear wall" than "you are somewhere else listening how far each instrument is"

I mean its certainly true that if a speaker was designed for full space use then it doesn't sound optimal backed against wall, but when the speaker is designed to be on-wall it should sound right, right?

I think there is no right and wrong. Just different types to choose from for own preferences and room and favorite music.

 

[BenB]

No. Last March...April I designed seven different half space i.e. flush-mounted wall speakers. Very basic vented 2-ways with separate 5"+1" drivers without separate WG and one coaxial too. Fitting of test baffle to wall was far from perfect with small step, but still that concept is significantly better than conventional small box speaker in almost everything. Especially in dynamics and spatial quality including tolerance to listening distance and geometry. Any distance from zero (head between the speakers) to at least 5 meters works - as well as different listening elevations so edgeless concept partly attenuates also severe lobing effects.
Waveguides, bevels, roundings and rounded bevels have been in my cookbook for few decades, but edgeless concept caused small reboot in my brain.

I've been beating this drum for a while now... without getting a lot of traction. Properly designed on-wall speakers gain efficiency (no baffle step), give owners back a few feet of their room, and provide better dynamics. On-wall line arrays take this a step further.

 

[Andreas007]

I would like to listen to them. Speaking of omni:

View attachment 178859

MBL 101 X-treme Omnidirectional Floorstanding Loudspeakers Review

High-end audiophile reference loudspeakers that recreate a recorded musical performance like no other.

www.ecoustics.com

I have ... of course not listened to them either. I do not care to check what they cost. Enough to look at them, you realize, they cost a decent penny.

Heard them at the High End in Munich. Very special, not comparable to anything else, difficult to describe. They were somehow "holografic" as it seemed that instruments (classical music playing) were placed on various spots in the room. It was a nice "effect". Overall I liked them.
I guess they create a special sound "atmosphere" which can be captivating. In the end it's a special toy with special sound for people who can afford them.

 

[gino1961]

omnis have a weird way of rendering the soundstage
I wonder if any recording engineer mixes using omnis I doubt

 

[Tangband]

To have both worlds, the imaging part requires no reflections within the frontal arrived sound the first few ms. The cleaner this first arrival is, the better detail from the recording.

Yes, and this is also true when we do recordings of real instruments in a concert hall . You keep the microphones away from the floor and walls using microphonestands , at about 1,5-2 meter from nearest reflection area . Putting the microphone nearer a reflective wall or floor , like 30 cm away from it, the sound will be very colored and less clear .

A recording situation with a microphone is simply a reversed situation of the playback situation from a loudspeaker .

Understanding this , it make it clear that we dont want early reflections from the nearby wall or floor from a loudspeaker in the listening room . The nearest 5 ms reflections should be avoided . So you put your speakers on a stand and away from the sidewalls and frontwall for the best sound.
A big carpet on the floor makes the sound much improved.

Subjective thoughts :
To make this more complicated, the
stereo system flaws really needs some late reflections from the sidewalls in the listening room , about 25 ms delayed reflections are optimal to make the stereo illusion as big as it gets. Having the sidewalls about 6 meters away from each L and R speaker is in my opinion about optimal . The stereo system also needs, in my opinion , some late reflections also from the frontwall to improve the illusion of the recorded event . This philosophy makes me dislike the sound from
Inwall or onwall speakers .

The optimal room for 2 channel playback is unfortunately a rather big room.

 

[Thomas_A]

Yes, and this is also true when we do recordings of real instruments in a concert hall . You keep the microphones away from the floor and walls using microphonestands , at about 1,7 meter from nearest reflection area . Putting the microphone nearer a reflective wall or floor , like 30 cm away from it, the sound will be very colored and less clear .

A recording situation with a microphone is simply a reversed situation of the playback situation from a loudspeaker .

Understanding this , it make it clear that we dont want early reflections from the nearby wall or floor from a loudspeaker in the listening room . The nearest 5 ms reflections should be avoided . So you put your speakers on a stand and away from the sidewalls and frontwall for the best sound.
A big carpet on the floor makes the sound much improved.

Subjective thoughts :
To make this more complicated, the
stereo system flaws really needs some late reflections from the sidewalls in the listening room , about 25 ms delayed reflections are optimal to make the stereo illusion as big as it gets. Having the sidewalls about 4 meters away from each L and R speaker is in my opinion about optimal .

The front wall makes less of a problem, just use near wall speakers and damping behind. For side-wall just keep below certain levels and not too early. We are all used to reflections in our living room. Stereo is flawed in many ways, and reflections do fill in some of these errors. 25 ms is way too long for our living rooms. Instead avoid early frontal reflections.

 

[TimW]

You keep the microphones away from the floor and walls using microphonestands , at about 1,7 meter from nearest reflection area . Putting the microphone nearer a reflective wall or floor , like 30 cm away from it, the sound will be very colored and less clear .

Have you heard of Boundary mics? Here is an excerpt from the wikipedia page about them:

In 1978, audio engineers Ed Long and Ron Wickersham studied the effects of the boundary layer in sound recording. In a study of flush-mounted microphones, they realized if the mic is only a few millimeters away from a large surface, there is a boost in coherence of sound signals, as they are still in phase after being stopped at the boundary. The point where the waves were stopped at the boundary was called a "pressure field" or "pressure zone". They also noted that using a mic in this set-up leads to a six dB boost in sound pressure. Only two years after Long and Wickersham's research, in 1980 Crown Audio developed and marketed the first boundary mic.

 

[gino1961]

... A recording situation with a microphone is simply a reversed situation of the playback situation from a loudspeaker ....

if i understand well if omni mics are used for recording omni speakers should be used for monitoring the recording ? i am not so sure
Well i am sure that at least for classical music omnis are very popular But engineers mix on monopole monitors (i do not know how to define a normal speaker)
I have seen many and many pictures of recording studios No one is using omni speakers for monitoring Not just one
If engineers who make the mixes do not use them i dont see the reason why to use omni at home I would like to hear what the engineer has heard

 

[Doenerkunde]

The best imaging speaker I ever owned was a pair of Sonics Argenta and to this day I have no idea why this particular speaker performed so well in this department: 2 way, bass reflex, SEAS TFF27 tweeter, SEAS CA18RLY midwoofer, boxy cabinet without rounded edged, offset tweeter, six part crossover with two capacitors, two inductors, two resistors. It sounds like a total cliche but I really had (non hifi associated) people standing up and searching the room for a hidden center speaker, because the center image was just so pinpoint perfect.

They were made by Joachim Gerhard, who has the reputation to design speakers that image very well. I don´t know how he did it, but oh boy did he pull it of with this one.

 

[ctrl]

The best imaging speaker I ever owned was a pair of Sonics Argenta and to this day I have no idea why this particular speaker performed so well in this department ...people standing up and searching the room for a hidden center speaker, because the center image was just so pinpoint perfect.

This was most likely achieved with a very slight hump in the power frequency response in the 2-4kHz range and possibly rather present highs.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to find any measurements off the speaker.

But as always, there is a price to pay. With many recordings, such tunings tend to sound slightly aggressive in "normal" listening rooms.

Therefore, there was also a successor for the speaker, the "Sonics Argenta Edition". The review says the following:

Compared to the "Standard" Argenta, the "Argenta Edition" has a more restrained tuning and takes a small step towards the mainstream. This is certainly a shortcoming for detail fetishists who want to investigate falling batons or coughing musicians with an acoustic magnifying glass, but a plus point for lovers of more coherent sound images and musical relaxation.

Source: https://www.connect.de/testbericht/sonics-argenta-edition-311593.html

Quote from a standard Argentas review:

"... On the plus side, the Argenta's liveliness and three-dimensionality are quite clear to me. ... In the long run, however, the midrange reproduction can tire. It is too hard, too present ..."

Source: https://www.testberichte.de/test/produkt_tests_sonics_argenta_p63736.html

But I too have not yet found the secret formula for speaker design and tuning with which you can have it all - if anyone here knows, let me know.

 

[Doenerkunde]

This was most likely achieved with a very slight hump in the power frequency response in the 2-4kHz range and possibly rather present highs.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to find any measurements off the speaker.

But as always, there is a price to pay. With many recordings, such tunings tend to sound slightly aggressive in "normal" listening rooms.

That could very well be it. Measurements in the hifi press seemed very linear with just a small bump around 700hz (resonance of the surrounding of the woofer or port resonance?), but with smoothing, absence of an anechoic room, generous scaling of the axis etc some important things may have been masked. Was only able to find this unreadably bad scan from "Hifi Test", but remember stereoplay/Audio measurements from this time.

They were pretty fatiguing (probably the reason I got some used Harbeths next :-D ). Got the Sonics as insolvent assets from an auction that ended during a world championship soccer game, great deal.

Fascinating how many things boil down to (seemingly trivial) amplitude!

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Have you heard of Boundary mics? Here is an excerpt from the wikipedia page about them:

In 1978, audio engineers Ed Long and Ron Wickersham studied the effects of the boundary layer in sound recording. In a study of flush-mounted microphones, they realized if the mic is only a few millimeters away from a large surface, there is a boost in coherence of sound signals, as they are still in phase after being stopped at the boundary. The point where the waves were stopped at the boundary was called a "pressure field" or "pressure zone". They also noted that using a mic in this set-up leads to a six dB boost in sound pressure. Only two years after Long and Wickersham's research, in 1980 Crown Audio developed and marketed the first boundary mic.

I picked up one of these at a flea market in the hope that I can figure out something to do with it.

 

[gino1961]

The best imaging speaker I ever owned was a pair of Sonics Argenta and to this day I have no idea why this particular speaker performed so well in this department: 2 way, bass reflex, SEAS TFF27 tweeter, SEAS CA18RLY midwoofer,

Thanks a lot for the very helpful advice The drivers must be good but no alien technology
Let's try to understand what can make the wonderful soundstage

boxy cabinet

so it is not the cabinet

without rounded edged,

so they are not the rounded edges

offset tweeter,

i dont think that this could matter really

six part crossover with two capacitors, two inductors, two resistors.

maybe we are underestimating the xover design ? this is a very important point to focus on
could it be that the superior soundstage ability is due to it?
Do you have a schematic maybe ?
in general i think that xover design should be more important than parts quality used in it
If its design is wrong no exotic part can fix that
This is a very interesting speaker to investigate given its straordinary soundstage rendition
If it sounds so good there must be something in its design peculiar
The fact that it can soundstage even with a very basic cabinet is also very very interesting This changes completely my point of view
The xover is the suspect here ... imho
Moreover i have a cd test There is a track for phase check I quote the leaflet here below

SHEFFIELD/XLO TEST AND BURN-IN CD
Technical Notes by Roger Skoff ....

TRACK 2: Relative Phase Test (0:39) AN "IN-PHASE/ OUT OF PHASE" RECORDING OF THIS TYPE IS THE VERY BEST TOOL YOU CAN USE TO MAKE SURE YOUR SPEAKERS ARE PROPERLY WIRED AND PROPERLY PLACED. IT CAN EVEN HELP YOU TO IMPROVE THE ACOUSTICS OF YOUR LISTENING ROOM!

A. Properly Wired As applied to loudspeakers, the term "Relative Phase" refers to the movement of the speaker system's driver elements (usually cones, domes, panels or ribbons) in response to a signal of known polarity. If the elements of both the Left and Right loudspeakers move IN THE SAME DIRECTION [forward] for a given [positive] signal, and do so at the same time, the speakers are IN correct relative phase. If they move in OPPOSITE directions (one forward, one back), they are OUT OF correct relative phase. The result of speakers being out of relative phase is that imaging specificity is lost and, because the Right and Left channel woofers at least partially cancel each other, bass energy and volume are greatly reduced. If this is NOT what you hear when you play the OUT OF PHASE section of this track; if, instead, you find that the OUT OF PHASE section images BETTER than the IN PHASE section, or that Roger Skoff's voice has more bass content OUT OF PHASE than it does IN PHASE, there's something wrong with your System, and the odds are that ONE of your loudspeakers is wired incorrectly. To fix it, check your speaker cables at both their amplifier and loudspeaker ends. When you find the end that has its leads hooked-up POSITIVE to NEGATIVE and NEGATIVE to POSITIVE, instead of POSITIVE to POSITIVE and NEGATIVE to NEGATIVE, as they should be, just re-make those connections, and your problem will disappear.

my wild guess is that soundstage rendition has a lot to do with speaker's phase vs frequency
And that the best xovers do not ruin the phase
I dont know how by the way
Moreover there is a rumor saying that some tracks are recorded out of phase This is a game of massacre