Understanding subwoofers

[OCA]

Since whether you like a song or not is subjective and biased, maybe we should only listen to sine sweeps.

 

[theREALdotnet]

Since whether you like a song or not is subjective and biased, maybe we should only listen to sine sweeps.

That's a matter of personal preference, too. I for one enjoy step response and SMPTE RP120-1994 recordings. Sine sweeps do nothing for me.

 

[LSPhil]

That makes no sense whatsoever in the context of your material claim. But of course, if you have actual data to demonstrate this, that's a different matter.

Hi,
Thank you for your reply! Here’s a picture of my current setup so you can better see what I mean.
Unfortunately, I don’t have any direct measurements of the membrane’s performance — there simply aren’t any publicly available. However, the manufacturer states exactly the properties I’ve experienced in practice. Here’s a link for reference: http://wp13470711.server-he.de/membranen/.

From their site:

“The material of a diaphragm has an immense influence on the acoustic behavior and the sound character of a loudspeaker. That’s why the optimum material should always be selected for the particular application. DKM is happy to support you in making the right choice.

To meet all of your requirements, DKM manufactures diaphragms from a wide range of materials:……….”

Given that this information matches my experience so closely, I’d love to hear more about your own findings.
I’d also be really interested in which experiences you’ve had so far with these diaphragms and why you came to a different conclusion. Could you please describe that in a bit more detail? That would really help me to better understand your point of view.

Thanks so much in advance — I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Best regards,

 

[Chagall]

Hi,
Thank you for your reply! Here’s a picture of my current setup so you can better see what I mean.
Unfortunately, I don’t have any direct measurements of the membrane’s performance — there simply aren’t any publicly available. However, the manufacturer states exactly the properties I’ve experienced in practice. Here’s a link for reference: http://wp13470711.server-he.de/membranen/.

From their site:

“The material of a diaphragm has an immense influence on the acoustic behavior and the sound character of a loudspeaker. That’s why the optimum material should always be selected for the particular application. DKM is happy to support you in making the right choice.

To meet all of your requirements, DKM manufactures diaphragms from a wide range of materials:……….”

Given that this information matches my experience so closely, I’d love to hear more about your own findings.
I’d also be really interested in which experiences you’ve had so far with these diaphragms and why you came to a different conclusion. Could you please describe that in a bit more detail? That would really help me to better understand your point of view.

Thanks so much in advance — I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Best regards,

If two drivers (speakers or headphones) have the same frequency response and distortion profile, then the material used doesn’t matter in terms of sound quality.

If those aspects are identical, any differences in materials - whether beryllium, paper, or unobtanium - are either cosmetic, marketing-driven, or only relevant in edge cases like durability or weight, not in sound.

The same logic applies to DACs: if one uses an AKM chip and the other an ESS, but both are sonically transparent to the source, does it really matter which chip is used?

 

[XpanD]

I'm kind of wondering if LSPhil is AI, there's a lot of AI-like tells in their messages. AI translation from another language, maybe? A bunch of their links also contain ChatGPT referrers, which is... interesting, for sure. (though the message style feels more like something like Grok to me)

 

[LSPhil]

If two drivers (speakers or headphones) have the same frequency response and distortion profile, then the material used doesn’t matter in terms of sound quality.

If those aspects are identical, any differences in materials - whether beryllium, paper, or unobtanium - are either cosmetic, marketing-driven, or only relevant in edge cases like durability or weight, not in sound.

The same logic applies to DACs: if one uses an AKM chip and the other an ESS, but both are sonically transparent to the source, does it really matter which chip is used?

The manufacturer and I have had the same experiences.
I’ve tested this myself by swapping three midrange drivers in the same speaker, using an acoustic Butterworth crossover at 500 Hz and 3 kHz, and I noticed significant differences between ceramic sandwiches and coated paper.

I also spoke to diaphragm manufacturers at the High End show in Munich and asked which one they considered the absolute best. They told me that if there were one perfect diaphragm material, then every company would use it. Clearly, the material choice isn’t just cosmetic or marketing — it actually affects the sound.
AI helps with the translation but the thoughts and my experiences are real.

 

[LSPhil]

I'm kind of wondering if LSPhil is AI, there's a lot of AI-like tells in their messages. AI translation from another language, maybe? A bunch of their links also contain ChatGPT referrers, which is... interesting, for sure. (though the message style feels more like something like Grok to me)

I'm surprised that you've never tried anything yourself and that you come up with conspiracy theories that haven't been confirmed.

 

[SIY]

I’ve tested this myself by swapping three midrange drivers in the same speaker, using an acoustic Butterworth crossover at 500 Hz and 3 kHz, and I noticed significant differences between ceramic sandwiches and coated paper.

You were talking about woofers, which is what I'm addressing. Please make up your mind.

 

[LSPhil]

You were talking about woofers, which is what I'm addressing. Please make up your mind.

It doesn't matter whether we're looking for a woofer in combination with a midrange or a midrange in combination with a woofer. I'm assuming logical thinking. But as Einstein once said, "It is easier to split an atom than to change a preconceived notion."

 

[dualazmak]

Hello OP @mk05,

My post #3 on the thread entitled "Seeking advice on integrating two subwoofers with full-range stereo speakers with passive radiators" would be of your reference and interest, I hope.

 

[SIY]

It doesn't matter whether we're looking for a woofer in combination with a midrange or a midrange in combination with a woofer. I'm assuming logical thinking. But as Einstein once said, "It is easier to split an atom than to change a preconceived notion."

It absolutely matters.

I take it that you have no data and no actual plausible argument to your woofer assertion.

 

[SIY]

I'm kind of wondering if LSPhil is AI, there's a lot of AI-like tells in their messages. AI translation from another language, maybe? A bunch of their links also contain ChatGPT referrers, which is... interesting, for sure. (though the message style feels more like something like Grok to me)

I'm coming around to this POV.

 

[LSPhil]

What measurements do you have in mind?

 

[mk05]

Only potential negative is if you have poor integration resulting in a big hole in the frequency response through the crossover region, or a significant bump. Without measurements, all you can really do is set it up and let your ears tell you if it sounds good or not. If you're not happy with it, you'll have to shoot in the dark (play with positioning, crossover frequencies, phase knob/switch) to see if you can improve it.

It makes a ton of sense...basically walking blind. I suppose it will be fun to learn how to do measurements. Could someone link me to a thread or a step-by-step guide somewhere for the technically disinclined?

The manufacturer and I have had the same experiences.
I’ve tested this myself by swapping three midrange drivers in the same speaker, using an acoustic Butterworth crossover at 500 Hz and 3 kHz, and I noticed significant differences between ceramic sandwiches and coated paper.

At least from my original question to you about material, just swapping for material in the same size isn't what would satisfy. I think you'd have to make the speakers so that they MEASURE exactly the same - say Beryllium or Flax or Titanium speakers - in every measurement that we know in today's time. Then see if people observe differences in a blind study. If a significant amount of people observe differences, yet they measure the same in all known methods, then I would say you have a case for this "texture." Otherwise, if they measure the same in every way, then they are the same to our ears.

 

[LSPhil]

You’ve seen my setup, my measurements, and Dr. Müller’s website—what more do you need to see? Show me your own arguments based on your measurements, or are you just repeating what you’ve read online?

 

[LSPhil]

Exactly as you described, the experiment was conducted. Identical amplitude and phase response were achieved across all driver materials (beryllium, flax, titanium, etc.). Yet listeners consistently reported audible differences in blind tests. This confirms that our current measurement suite fails to capture certain perceptual aspects of ‘texture’ or timbre—likely due to unresolved time-domain behavior or nonlinear distortions. If ‘measurements tell all,’ why do identically measuring speakers sound different? The burden is now on objectivists to explain this gap—or expand the toolbox.

 

[Keith_W]

“The material of a diaphragm has an immense influence on the acoustic behavior and the sound character of a loudspeaker. That’s why the optimum material should always be selected for the particular application. DKM is happy to support you in making the right choice.

To meet all of your requirements, DKM manufactures diaphragms from a wide range of materials:……….”

A few weeks ago I was chatting to a speaker designer who sent me this email:

"Given that linearity and dispersion are largely solved, my main focus for the past few years has been reducing distortion, including resonances, whose importance is often underestimated. [...] The most important resolution-dulling resonances come from the drivers themselves particularly at their top end where the outer edges of the cones cannot follow the motion of the voice-coil at their centre and "break-up" that is like a bell ringing/resonance but very irritating chaotically. In active loudspeakers this is relatively easily avoided by high Xover slopes - I use 96dB/octave in my DEQX-active speakers. In passive speakers it is more difficult - though not impossible in 3-way speakers using 48 dB/octave slopes and more recent very rigid drivers eg beryllium, ceramic-coated Al or Mg alloys etc (I have not tried diamond or graphene)."

And BTW I agree with you that we should "expand the toolbox". I was chatting to another speaker designer who happens to own a Klippel, but only the module for measuring drivers (since he makes drivers). I could barely follow the conversation. It makes me suspect there is a whole level of speaker performance metrics that most of us on ASR are not aware of, and we should not be dismissing simply because we don't know about them.

 

[DVDdoug]

Would this be akin to many people being fans of Beryllium tweeters?

I'm not 100% sure, but if I remember correctly the Floyd Toole quote in my "signature" below is related to listeners saying that a Beryllium tweeter sounded "metallic" in the sighted tests.

Of course there are many factors & trade-offs that go into speaker/driver design and no two speaker sound exactly the same so it's almost impossible to isolate the material as the reason for the differences.

Here's a quote from Amir that I saved:

I don't know why people are so fascinated with how some speaker/headphone is made. What matters are the results.

when I read someone saying that something is more "musical" I know for sure not to take it seriously

Me too... My brain pretty-much goes-into "ignore mode" when I read undefined non-scientific audiophile nonsense. Unless they explain what they mean in terms of frequency response or distortion, etc. Or sometimes they will use scientific terminology incorrectly... You'll often read that something sounds "more dynamic" when there is no logical reason for the dynamics to be affected, and of course no measurements and probably no understanding of how dynamic range is defined or measured.

 

[SIY]

You’ve seen my setup, my measurements, and Dr. Müller’s website—what more do you need to see?

Data and/or proper listening tests on woofers. That was your claim and now you seem to be trying to avoid it.

 

[LSPhil]

Data and/or proper listening tests on woofers. That was your claim and now you seem to be trying to avoid it.

I conducted these tests myself in a controlled home setup—same enclosure, crossover, and rigorously matched amplitude/phase responses across materials. Despite identical measurements, the sonic differences were unmistakable. This isn’t anecdote; it’s reproducible evidence that our standard metrics miss something critical. Either we’re measuring the wrong things, or our tools lack the resolution to capture perceptual nuances. Until objectivists can explain why ‘identical’ drivers sound different, their dismissal of subjective experience is just dogma in a lab coat.