Speakers w/Full-range Drivers

[NTK]

Yes, I want to be very respectful of the forum and its members, and I am intensely aware of my own technical limitations. Having said that, what I found interesting about the Audience speakers is that the designer has taken the trouble to publish on his website a 10 page(!) white paper that includes, among other things, what appears to these untrained eyes as a very smooth frequency response (page 2), and a step response graph (page 9) with what appear to be relatively comprehensive explanations of the measuring techniques. Given that some folks here - including Amir - have done a significant amount of thinking (and doing) on speaker measurements, I’m curious how the Audience measurements measure up (sorry for pun), and whether folks think those measurements are sufficient to capture fully what’s going on with full-range drivers. Full disclosure: my intuition leans towards “no”, but I acknowledge that intuition to be relatively uninformed, hence my posts.

The standard resolution for loudspeaker frequency response curve is 1/20 octave. It is very easy for a 1/3 octave resolution FR plot to look smooth and devoid of response errors. It is usually considered misleading when showing such low resolution data.

 

[GXAlan]

All this and no mention of Eclipse yet?

I did mention it as Fujitsu/Eclipse.

Proponents of full-range drivers talk about the benefits of eliminating the comb effect and phase issues, dynamics not being sacrificed by a crossover, the tonal consistency of one driver, etc.

But those who’ve advise against it talk about IMD, limited dynamics, dispersion constraints…

All that said, this is one reason I think active speakers are a potentially useful approach. I have had full range speakers and all sorts of different brands but have settled down on Meyer Sound speakers.

They do a lot of work to minimize the comb effect, maintain phase linearity, and they are one of the masters of dynamics. However you get the advantages associated with multi-way speakers.

Still, all-pass filters are done digitally not through analog crossovers, so it’s very possible that those comments about full range drivers had some nuggets of truth.

If you have gone to a Cirque du Soleil show, a Broadway musical, or an Ed Sheeran concert, it was probably experienced with Meyer Sound speakers.

it’s really easy to distinguish live music from recorded music, even from another room. Can we measure that? I honestly don’t know, but would love others’ thoughts.

The difference is in the recording not the speaker reproduction.

I’m curious how the Audience measurements measure up (sorry for pun), and whether folks think those measurements are sufficient to capture fully what’s going on with full-range drivers.

There is on axis versus sum of on and off axis

Audience ClairAudient The One loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

And there is smoothing with the factory measurements which may be a better representation of how we hear things in stereo. That is, if frequency response irregularities are masked in stereo playback, how do we assess the level of masking? If psychoacoustic smoothing is the answer, then maybe the smoothened measurements are fair.

 

[Heinrich]

Which don't necessarily correlate though to audibility as multitone distortions usually rise when using a driver that plays mids and highs also to reproduce bass and is together with the directivity problems of the most the reasons why full band driver usage is a strong compromise unless for special listening cases like for example small listeing distances and levels.

Exactly—now chose music that doen‘t need bass so much, and the treble is meant as a bit of icing on the cake and you‘re there.
Eventually, people like to experience an illusion with stereo „as if you are in“. As a scientist, would you tell that the particular illusion chosen is wrong and has to be replaced by another ;-)

The original question was, if the speaker brand in question solved a problem. Alas, From their marketing publication I would say no. Even more of a pitty is the bass tuning, which exposes inherent limitations up to a no-go from my side.

 

[mhardy6647]

Seeing a reference to "Fujitsu/Eclipse" (unfamiliar to me) above reminded me of another big Japanese conglomerate!
The Mitsubishi Diatone drivers (various, uhhh, variants of the AlNiCo P-610) have been well regarded in many some circles.
I like 'em, but they stopped making them before I ponied up for a pair, so there aren't ever likely to be any here.

I've also been considering the foolhardiness of mentioning the Silbatone/Bae cabinet designed for the venerable Western Electric (later Altec) 755 fine family of extended range drivers*. Considering that we cannot spell foolhardy without Hardy , I'm goin' for it.

A visit to J-Rob's and the Silbatone 755A box by Dr. Stefano Bae

jelabs.blogspot.com

Home Brewer: Silbatone 755 Cabinet DIYers Club

jelabs.blogspot.com

Last year, I commissioned my son (the mathematician who took up woodworking during the COVID era) to make me a pair of these enclosures for me to put a pair of Fukuin-era Pioneer dual-compliance ("Biflex", in Altec lexicon) extended-range drivers. They ain't 755s, but they ain't bad, either.

The Pioneer PIM-8L (PIM-20L in the metric world ), also sold under many other brand names around the world, including as the SK-98 by Lafayette Radio Electronics (LRE) in New York.

Pioneer PIM-20A/PIM-8の仕様 パイオニア

audio-heritage.jp

The blue driver is an SK-98.




_______________
* The 8-inch 755 drivers were very inexpensive when new, meant for things like background music and intercom/announcement systems in offices. They were, famously, used as tweeters by Villchur in the original Acoustic Research design, the AR-1. They're not inexpensive now.

source: https://community.classicspeakerpag...-the-deal-acoustic-research-ar-1-waltec-755a/

 

[mhardy6647]

Strictly FYI & FWIW (for shoots and googles, as I like to say ): The later, somewhat lesser (by reputation today, at any rate) ceramic-magnet Altec 755E 8" dual compliance driver in context of some of its 'extended range' and coaxial peers and colleagues.
source: https://www.alliedcatalogs.com/flipbook/1970_allied_radio_catalog.html pg 95

 

[mhardy6647]

This thread/discussion finally got me around to doing some needed rehabilitation to the mass loaded TQWTs mentioned back in post #23!








Listening to Natalie Merchant on 'em as I type this.

 

[Salt]

All that tiny thin wires

 

[mhardy6647]

3 watts per channel

 

[mdalton]

very cool. Your TQWTs are nearly the splitting image of the Pearl Acoustics Sibelius. Have you ever heard them?

 

[mhardy6647]

very cool. Your TQWTs are nearly the splitting image of the Pearl Acoustics Sibelius. Have you ever heard them?

No, sorry -- though I do know the name.

These were designed by a fellow called Bob Brines, informed by Martin King's (once?) well-known website -- back around the turn of the century.
I reckon that all folded TQWTs look about the same.

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20050421082455/http://www.geocities.com/rbrines1/Pages/Proposals.html

The 40-1354 was a darling of sorts in the "full range" community at a time and for a time. It is a (considerably) nicer sounding than average twincone driver, and the price in its time was very right.

 

[zman01]

Good see a Brines Acoustics speaker still in action.

 

[Jaxjax]

3 watts per channel

I've ran the PIM-8 20 years ago in an active/passive hybrid OB project & had one of my most memorable music moments on a steven stills track with those. I burnt one up which was a real bummer as I didn't have a spare & then proceeded to burn a few Corals up...ugggg went to modern drivers after that except for 10-12" guitar cab drivers.

 

[mhardy6647]

I've ran the PIM-8 20 years ago in an active/passive hybrid OB project & had one of my most memorable music moments on a steven stills track with those. I burnt one up which was a real bummer as I didn't have a spare & then proceeded to burn a few Corals up...ugggg went to modern drivers after that except for 10-12" guitar cab drivers.

I had to click "like" for the subject matter, but it's a shame to have lost those drivers.
The PIM-8L is a nice sounding piece of hardware. I have less experience with the Coral drivers (only the "Holey Basket" ones, really). Some of the other FR Corals (in particular) were absolutely lovely in construction.

 

[Poultrygeist]

My first introduction to FRSD speakers came when I attended Hornfest and listed to the Horn Shoppe Horns. Ed Schilling doesn't sell them anymore but there are plenty of reviews still out there ( one by Art Dudley of Stereophile ). I was immediately hooked and not long after I found the plans for the Frugal Horns which are also back loaded horns and used the same Foxtex driver. I built them and haven't looked back. Placed in corners and powered by a Pass amp the bass can be surprising for such a small driver.

I also like the FaST approach which is defined as full range assisted subwoofer technology. I don't know who came up with the term but it just means augmenting the FRSD with a sub. As Jacob George of Rethm speakers recommends, "use the wide bander as a wide bander with no restrictions or filters and bring in the bass to fill in what the wide bander can not do."

 

[Poultrygeist]

My enjoyment of full range speakers includes open baffles powered by SET amps with their bass woofers driven by plate amps.

 

[Ktacos]

I find curious that most full range drivers I see people using have pretty atrocious responses, while there are ones out there with pretty good performance.


For instance, I don't see this driver used much if at all, it looks perfect for a WAW. It's the peerless NE65 on IEC baffle.

 

[Poultrygeist]

After some years with the Fostex drivers in the Frugal Horns I replaced them with Mark Audio drivers which aren't as flea watt friendly but do provide superior SQ.

 

[Poultrygeist]

I find curious that most full range drivers I see people using have pretty atrocious responses, while there are ones out there with pretty good performance.


For instance, I don't see this driver used much if at all, it looks perfect for a WAW. It's the peerless NE65 on IEC baffle.

View attachment 428564

Sadly it's nearly impossible to audition full range single drivers and speakers. Buying or building your own requires a leap of faith. The full range drivers I've owned and enjoyed include Lowther DX3, Tang Band 1808's, Pioneer Bofu's ( a favorite of Nelson Pass ), Mark Audio's, Fostex FE126en, Eminence Legends ( used in Zu's ), Coral Holly Baskets, and the Zenith 49CZ alnico's from 1957.

 

[Ktacos]

Sadly it's nearly impossible to audition full range single drivers and speakers. Buying or building your own requires a leap of faith.

I'm not sure I would agree there. One does not need to take a leap of faith if there is manufacturer published data available, though some if it's misleading like mark audios hilarious wide db range that makes anything look great. Seems like the logical thing to do would be to pick the driver that has the most linear response, least amount of break up, and least amount of resonances. Also best to keep them smaller rather than larger to avoid beaming too early.

 

[Poultrygeist]

I'm not sure I would agree there. One does not need to take a leap of faith if there is manufacturer published data available, though some if it's misleading like mark audios hilarious wide db range that makes anything look great. Seems like the logical thing to do would be to pick the driver that has the most linear response, least amount of break up, and least amount of resonances. Also best to keep them smaller rather than larger to avoid beaming too early.

Would you buy a driver based upon published data alone?