• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

What is your audio Philosophy?

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
3,075
Likes
2,180
Location
UK
Is there anything in their measurements that is sub par?

Is science in consensus on this technology being sub par?

Or is it your opinion?
Just look up how they 'work'. Another thread, perhaps.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
It seems he got banned from his own forum when he wrote calm well reasoned posts contradicting some of the more ridiculous excess it descended to.
I am most grateful he started this one.
A good percentage of us here have been banned for doing the same at WBF
More appropriately called WBSF
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
Just look up how they 'work'. Another thread, perhaps.

You answer the question as if your claim is a fact on which audio science is in agreement on.

I can’t find any research supporting this «fact».
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
I bet I could make some gear that measured well but sounded bad. I would just need to know what your tests were missing and exploit that; the implication being that although a normal designer wouldn't do it deliberately, they might do it inadvertently.
Ah but that would be cheating. You need to know what he missed measuring ( the errors) to take advantage of it. tisk tisk
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
Let's try to remain civil here guys.
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
Reflex loading is similar to a helmholtz resonator isn’t it?
Subjectively I prefer sealed enclosures are there and]y real disadvantages ?
Keith
 

bobhol

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
57
Likes
38
My Audio Philosophy

I love the music more than the playback equipment that I am using. I am a slave to my equipment. I am also a slave to my environment whether it’s my parents’ house, an apartment building with thin walls or a lonely house with plenty of room. Only recently have I had excess money to spend on audio but my Jack Benny sensibilities prevent me from extravagant purchases. I have always had a turntable, and currently have three that I like. But I feel the days of vinyl have past for me. I have always had a devise to record music either from the radio or from someone else’s records; Reel to reel Tape, Cassettes and now computer hard drives. I have fun with my equipment but am above all in love with the music.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
3,075
Likes
2,180
Location
UK
Reflex loading is similar to a helmholtz resonator isn’t it?
Subjectively I prefer sealed enclosures are there and]y real disadvantages ?
Keith
I would say that if someone's philosophy was "no compromise" they wouldn't tolerate the considerable disadvantages of a port. If the claim was that it allowed higher SPLs and a low THD 'bass effect' that their customers definitely needed, you could go one better and use sealed enclosures with motion feedback or maybe some other technology and get super-accurate bass with no disadvantages other than some complexity.

This isn't totally off-topic: someone's philosophy could be one of believing the measurements, but another philosophy might be to 'believe the design'; to be aware that measurements don't tell the whole story and that, for example, ports look fine in a conventional frequency response measurement but this tells nothing like the whole story. Designing to get good, conventional measurements isn't the same as designing to create true hi-fi.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
This isn't totally off-topic: someone's philosophy could be one of believing the measurements,
True, but it would make a good subject to start a discussion thread on in the Speakers --- section. ;)
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,781
Location
Oxfordshire
Reflex loading is similar to a helmholtz resonator isn’t it?
Subjectively I prefer sealed enclosures are there and]y real disadvantages ?
Keith
It uses a Helmholz resonator in the same way a crankshaft "damper" machine tool bed damper and any other device which changes mode shape by adding an extra degree of freedom to a system. In the case of a standard reflex speaker the helmholz resonator is tuned to the natural frequency of the bass unit on its suspension thereby changing the system mode shape such that the drive unit doesn't vibrate but the mass of air in the port does. In a crank damper the mass on the rubber spring goes bonkers instead of the crank itself, on machine tools a mass on a spring goes into resonance so the bedplate doesn't, improving the surface finish of the part being machined.
A Helmholz resonator is my favoured way to reduce room modes, rather than room correction SW, which doesn't work when I play my CDs :)
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
I would say that if someone's philosophy was "no compromise" they wouldn't tolerate the considerable disadvantages of a port. If the claim was that it allowed higher SPLs and a low THD 'bass effect' that their customers definitely needed, you could go one better and use sealed enclosures with motion feedback or maybe some other technology and get super-accurate bass with no disadvantages other than some complexity.

This isn't totally off-topic: someone's philosophy could be one of believing the measurements, but another philosophy might be to 'believe the design'; to be aware that measurements don't tell the whole story and that, for example, ports look fine in a conventional frequency response measurement but this tells nothing like the whole story. Designing to get good, conventional measurements isn't the same as designing to create true hi-fi.


I can sort of agree. I think we do hear to some extent the issue with ported designs until...............

Until they get lower in frequency. Seems at low enough frequencies we aren't too bothered by phase anomalies. Not quite as deaf to them as at high frequencies, but apparently our hearing doesn't care so much as you go south of 80 hz. So ported woofs that the port is active in the 40-80 hz or higher range is sometimes weird. Those that have the port active lower than 40 hz don't seem to be heard to me. Or at least don't seem so obvious in having a sound in the bass. Given my druthers I would prefer sealed boxen.
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
Are they... p o r t e d...?
I didn't realise that brand had such a fatal flaw....

This is the manufacturer’s own words on ported vs sealed, in a document from 2003:

«Comparison of the performance of a closed box and a vented box of the same internal volume will reveal that:
• The efficiency of a closed box is lower than that of a vented box;
• To get same efficiency, the low frequency cut-off of a closed box will be higher;
• The driver displacement capacity must be higher in a closed box;
• Due to the required longer excursion of the driver in a closed box, the distortion is in
practice often higher;
• The impulse response of a closed box is often better than that of a vented box.»
Source: https://www.genelec.com/documents/publications/InsightintoSubwoofers.pdf

So it hardly seems like this is a trade-off they weren’t aware of 15 years ago.

In competent speakers (too) it seems like trade-offs are the common denominator; there is still no design that rules them all.

So we have measurements and we have subjective listening. I have never encountered the claim that this manufacturer’s design choices are flawed; you are the first to claim so.

Extraordinary claims should be supported by extraordinary evidence. I think that’s a sound principle.
 

Dimitri

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
365
Likes
426
Location
Valencia California
Sealed speakers have always been described as having "tight controlled bass" and being (more) insensitive to placement . I don't believe anyone has ever disputed that.
There are probably good or bad examples of each.
But I'll take my chances with a sealed box design before a ported one.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,781
Location
Oxfordshire
I have one pair of sealed box speakers, Yamaha NS1000M, one pair of horns and several reflex boxes. I also have a REL Studio sub which is a huge reflex box and probably over 20 years old now.
I like the Yamahas but can't say I have noticed a marked superiority in the bass from them.
 
Top Bottom