In search of my last great loudspeaker

[marty]

A quick count of the resolution of an i Phone is that it cuts the 20hz - 20 kHz range into around 60 measuring points , 30 of them being under 550 hz, this is a very poor/ rough measurement , and taking conclusions on that is doubtfull imo , it gives only a rough impression

Andromedaudio and user 211,

You are both correct. The tool that I'm using is not nearly as accurate as a calibrated test mic and recorder. But if neither of you have compared the exact program and tool that I generally use for "quick and dirty" measurement to some specific reference gear, than your argument is less powerful. In fact, I have compared it to several calibrated microphones and for my purposes, its just fine. i don't need something to be accurate to 0.1dB. What I'm looking for is an instrument that identify large deviations of >5dB very easily, and the iPhone/Analyze program is more than able to perform that function. It provides guidance, nothing more. But it is remarkably powerful and portable and therefore useful. In addition, one of the first things one learns in science is the difference between accuracy and precision (repeatability). It does an adequate job in both which is also beneficial. This is a good example of "perfect is the enemy of good". Indeed it isn't perfect, nor is it the last word in accuracy as you correctly point out. However, in this case, its a useful tool and more than good enough for my purposes.

Marty

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Changing amps affects FR, rolling tubes in your Lampi affects FR. I know because I have measured it. If you can hear it, you can measure the change in FR.

however; you want the speaker<->room FR to be your personal ideal. then the electronics compliment that environment. or offer choices.

not that you were making a case for another approach. just that rolling tubes or switching amps to attain fundamental system balance seems wrong. one needs a base line reference of neutrality or at least personal preference. and typically an amplifier that is already a personal reference would fit that situation.

I guess it's room first, then speaker to fit, and then electronics and source character that works.

there are chicken and egg aspects to this as obviously one needs an amplifier to start with.

 

[Keith_W]

Only in the low frequencies. You don't want to use DSP to fix peaks and valleys in the upper frequencies.

As it happens, I linearized my drivers and generated new crossovers yesterday using Acourate:





... the first picture is of the midbass woofer (50 - 500Hz), second is of the midrange horn (500 - 4000Hz). You can see that the native response of the driver (green in both graphs) is far from linear. Once corrected, they are +/- 1dB across the frequency range. The result of the woofer is even more impressive - +/- 0.5dB. There is no way an all analogue system can do that.

 

[Zero000]

I have compared the Umik test mic to the iPhone I used to use. That what I was saying and how I know. They were a world apart from each other with lots of DBs in variation.

iPhone 4, that was. But even a newer iPhone won't be much better.

Buy one of these Marty. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/pmik-1-detail

I use the Umik-1.

 

[ack]

So one thing is clear Marty, you like adjustable speakers. So I'd guess you are buying a used mega Wilson. Great information you posted!

 

[Zero000]

BTW you MUST apply the calibration file. It is just a text file that contains human readable DB compensation offsets against a known reference. Frequency versus DB correction value. So you will actually see how unlinear the mic is by default.

Every mic has its own unique set of compensation values.

 

[marty]

however; you want the speaker<->room FR to be your personal ideal. then the electronics compliment that environment. or offer choices.

not that you were making a case for another approach. just that rolling tubes or switching amps to attain fundamental system balance seems wrong. one needs a base line reference of neutrality or at least personal preference. and typically an amplifier that is already a personal reference would fit that situation.

I guess it's room first, then speaker to fit, and then electronics and source character that works.

there are chicken and egg aspects to this as obviously one needs an amplifier to start with.

Mike,
Is it any wonder I agree with you so often?
If anyone thinks that changing an amplifier provides a meaningful change in the frequency response of a speaker in a particular room, show me the data! Amplifiers generally act as signal wires with gain that provide a flat response in their power bandwidth within 0.25 dB or less. Now, of course amps will change the character and quality of what you hear, but a significant change in FR? Very doubtful, but I am willing to be convinced by data. As you said "just that rolling tubes or switching amps to attain fundamental system balance seems wrong". I couldn't agree more. Look to the room and the actual speaker for the greatest impact on FR.
Marty

 

[FrantzM]

however; you want the speaker<->room FR to be your personal ideal. then the electronics compliment that environment. or offer choices.

not that you were making a case for another approach. just that rolling tubes or switching amps to attain fundamental system balance seems wrong. one needs a base line reference of neutrality or at least personal preference. and typically an amplifier that is already a personal reference would fit that situation.

I guess it's room first, then speaker to fit, and then electronics and source character that works.

there are chicken and egg aspects to this as obviously one needs an amplifier to start with.

@Mike Lavigne
This is one of those days when the stars , planet, moons and galaxies are aligning .. I find nothing to disagree with you here !!!

@Marty
No Horns or Waveguide speakers in your search?

 

[Rodney Gold]

Using flat as a target for in room response at listening position sounds dreadful , all rooms have lf gain and treble droop at seated position.
I had a TacT rcs 2.2 .. a good product at the time , but the latest iterration of Dirac , even on the minidsp box is considerably better ..
.
At any rate , if one is only to use analog , DSP is not an option , but then fairly gross tone controls on speakers wont really cut it either as they normally only have a fixed hinge point and slope or they act on the whole driver range (ie all the drivers output boosted or cut)

One of the best analog eq systems I have heard is the cello palette .. was a bit too rich for my blood at the time (my pre dsp days) ..not sure how good they are these days or even if available

My suggestion Once you have the speaker you like set up in the room , I would run them analog full range and add 2 or more subs as a swarm , use dsp on the bass swarm to smooth the rooms bass response... thus maintaining the "purity" of your main speakers yet still have lower bass control.. IMO getting the bass right is 90% of the battle won , the rest can be corrected to a large extent with physical treatment.

at any rate , 1/2 the fun is the chase.. so enjoy it.. and I hope you end up with what makes you happy.

 

[Zero000]

Using flat as a target for in room response at listening position sounds dreadful , all rooms have lf gain and treble droop at seated position.
I had a TacT rcs 2.2 .. a good product at the time , but the latest iterration of Dirac , even on the minidsp box is considerably better ...

Absolutely 100% true bolded bit. I don't like DIRAC personally, I just use Equaliser APO with the Peace GUI. It is playback s/w agnostic i.e. it works with all, it is simple and it is free. Choose your target frequencies and Q values.

The DIRAC s/w processing does more than FR corrections and I found I couldn't live with it.

Marty even the iPhone mic I suggested won't be as good as the Umik. But if you must use an iPhone, try it?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

@Mike Lavigne
This is one of those days when the stars , planet, moons and galaxies are aligning .. I find nothing to disagree with you here !!!

@Marty
No Horns or Waveguide speakers in your search?

I don't presume to speak for Marty at all but I have an opinion on his perspective.....and I could be wrong. but I would expect that somehow doing large scale Mahler (or classical piano) really really well has something to do with his preferences. and I bet that has something to do with his room too.

and big boy dynamic driver full frequency range speakers likely have the best opportunity to get that job done.

and if it can do Mahler well.....then......

I've not spoken to Marty about this, but have listened with him a few times.

 

[andromedaaudio]

It depends also what membranematerial is used , a loudspeaker with a harsh sounding membrane material might sound better with that unit playing at least 3 db lower from neutral .
To my ears a 3 db tilted bass region and a gradually sloping down FR sounds best +- 3 db , but i think marty hints at that in the target curve discription .

 

[bonzo75]

I don't presume to speak for Marty at all but I have an opinion on his perspective.....and I could be wrong. but I would expect that somehow doing large scale Mahler (or classical piano) really really well has something to do with his preferences. and I bet that has something to do with his room too.

and big boy dynamic driver full frequency range speakers likely have the best opportunity to get that job done.

and if it can do Mahler well.....then......

I've not spoken to Marty about this, but have listened with him a few times.

It is because of Mahler 2 and Beethoven 9th and scheherazade, the apogee (right restored apogee) is my favorite speaker with no close second. For chamber and vocals there are many close contenders.

Dynamic speakers can't compare imo because I can't listen to violins at the top and bass at the bottom anymore, and the apogees move the whole vertical plane at you during slams rather than the sound coming from that woofer area. But we get off track as I don't want to make this another apogee thread

 

[andromedaaudio]

Woofers can be placed under / above tw/mid height , that is not a dynamic speaker limitation.
mikes speakers do that as well so do mine

 

[bonzo75]

Woofers can be placed under / above tw/mid height , that is not a dynamic speaker limitation.
mikes speakers do that as well so do mine

I haven't heard those so won't comment

 

[Mike Lavigne]

It is because of Mahler 2 and Beethoven 9th and scheherazade, the apogee (right restored apogee) is my favorite speaker with no close second. For chamber and vocals there are many close contenders.

Dynamic speakers can't compare imo because I can't listen to violins at the top and bass at the bottom anymore, and the apogees move the whole vertical plane at you during slams rather than the sound coming from that woofer area. But we get off track as I don't want to make this another apogee thread

I know you have listened to lots of great systems around the world.......and I have not listened to restored apogees......but there are other speakers that can image violins and bass correctly. it just takes the right room, gear and room tuning. those are not trivial issues. and apogees and bass have their own set of challenges to overcome less than perfectly.

assigning absolutes is a slippery slope.

I don't want to get OT either, but could not.....not respond to your comment.

 

[bonzo75]

Woofers can be placed under / above tw/mid height , that is not a dynamic speaker limitation.
mikes speakers do that as well so do mine

I missed out the Holst planets Mars. What I heard there is best summarized by Ron's comments below extracted from his review:

Postscript: I visited Steve today to catch up with I'm before I go back to London. I brought with me a CD of the Genesis album with the “Drum Duet” track -- with Phil Collins playing the drum kit on the left side of the stage and his colleague playing a drum kit on the right side of the stage. (Henk very kindly gave me his CD of that album.)

When the track was finished at Henk’s place my wife and I turned to each other and each of us basically said “Oh my God, that was amazing!” So I was really curious to hear this drum track on Steve’s very full-range and bass capable system. (Steve supplements his big Wilsons with JL Audio Fathoms.)

On Steve’s system the drum track today was very good but it was not involving and mesmerizing like it was on Henk’s system. Listening to the drums on the Grands seemed to my wife and me like an experience.

This is absolutely no criticism of Steve’s system. As I have written many times I love the sound from Steve’s system. I am very confident what I heard from this track on the Grands versus on conventional cones means that Kedar was correct about the amazing bass reproduction on the Grands: the woofer panel on the Grands -- which covers about 70 Hz to about 250 Hz -- is the best reproducer of that frequency range I have ever heard in my life. I do not think any dynamic driver speaker -- not Wilsons, not Genesis woofer towers, not Pendragon woofer towers, not any set of cones -- is going to reproduce 70 Hz or so to 250 Hz or so with the articulation and realism and power of those big, trapezoidal woofer panels on the Grands."
"

 

[steve williams]

On Steve’s system the drum track today was very good but it was not involving and mesmerizing like it was on Henk’s system. Listening to the drums on the Grands seemed to my wife and me like an experience.

when I see you next weekend Ron you will find the sound totally different with these Master Built Ultra cables . There is high end in my system now that I never imagined could exist. So similarly with top end detail. So as Mike L says it is all a matter of tuning with the right cables and finally I have found them

 

[Zero000]

I've just totally altered the sound of my Furutech cables by changing to Rhodium plugs. The mid range and treble quality has been radically improved for the better. Hard to believe plugs could have the affect that they appear to. I'm seriously happy with the small investment that brought about the change.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Bonzo you could be right about panels , me hearing them on possibly no more then 3 occasions , so i cant compare either .
I am sure panels due to their tech. differences have some attributes dynamic speakers cant duplicate and vice versa .
The tallest soundstage i ever heard and i found it to be to tall was when i heard dali megalines