KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search
- Thread starter KeithR
- Start date
Thanks Morricab, but I don't understand how this response answers my questions below?
PeterA said:
Could you then define what you mean by "low sensitivity speakers"? I have heard systems that I would describe as very dynamic which have 90 dB speakers and pretty big amplifiers. Perhaps my idea of dynamics is different from yours. How does one measure whether or not a speaker is dynamic?
I agree... but then again doing almost anything can cause a difference, changing the footers might make more of a difference vs a good xo. So, I'd say I don't notice a significant degradation in fidelity with high quality crossovers.
I think the appeal of single drivers needs to be seen in the context of what was available 20 years ago. Most conventional speakers had significant flaws. Now, for the most part we're nitpicking and many speakers are excellent, I could happily live with many different speakers on the market.
I'm not sure how many folks experienced the first years of RMAF, the quality of show systems back then was incredibly bad! Mediocre single drivers seemed like a relief sometimes!
Mickey Mouse drivers as opposed to JBL, TAD etc
Any examples of such drivers?
ALE 7550D..bad precision and terrible toilet role voice coil assy
I even bought a pair to try out
I even bought a pair to try out
Macro dynamics is bam slam, dynamic contrast
Micro dynamics is the slightest shift in music including weight of hand on the bow
Tonal contrast, changing of tone with inflections, also adds to micro dynamics.
You feel like music is covering a lot of ground as it goes from low to high, that is dynamic range.
If you want all of that, get horns, hombre
Agree with most of this (not necessarily horns). Some people think dynamics is just 1812 Overture when for me its just as much Johnny Cash's voice on Down by the Train.
The reason those "90db" Magicos need big amplifiers for dynamics is the high order, phase angle heavy crossovers they use. 90dbs in this case is relatively meaningless (and sometimes measured into 4 ohms which is fibbing a bit).
I say this as we get accustomed to saying high sensitive speakers are better dynamically, but that's not always been the case in my auditions (see Gamut, some say Boenicke). I think Wilson is considered "dynamic" more because of the upper bass hump that is designed into their speakers not just that they are relatively sensitive.
All speakers need high power to hit their true potential (if they can handle it). For example you might have some 98db speakers but to get to say 125db you might need 250-600w. Anything beyond 110db usually requires a lot. There are some 107db speakers that may take a bit less, but still are rated for a pretty high amount of power. It shouldn’t be a surprise that 500w on some 91db speakers is what can get then going. Then again sometimes the headroom is necessary to avoid saturation in some audiophile amps that aren’t designed well, like 250w amps that sound funny at a 30w peak.
Thanks Keith. Yes, I have heard 90dB Magicos sound incredibly dynamic with the right amplifiers, though I do not intend to make this a discussion about specific Magico speakers. It is clear that there are other more popular brands around here.
I'm still trying to understand how Morricab in particular, and others in general, define "low sensitivity speakers". If it is the case that "it all depends" based on crossovers, how the specs are measured, etc, then it will be difficult to specify a number. I get that. I was just looking for a starting point for the discussion.
Regarding dynamics, I think we all have varying opinions about what is dynamic. Some argue that horns are the most dynamic, and that may well be the case in most circumstances, but I have heard convincing dynamics from a number of speaker/amp combinations. Similarly, there are other attributes which lead to speaker purchases. It is clear that not everyone is a horn/set customer. After your year-long search, it seems that you are not yet ready to make that switch either.
Peter, I think there can be different kinds of dynamic sound. While I’ve heard dynamic sound from lots of stuff, there is something different about stuff that leans on the “pro” side.
Thanks, I've tried a few woofers and want to know what to avoid.
What are your favorites? I ended up using Acoustic Elegance TD15H+, which is a 15H with a stiffer paper cone and the same motor the 18H+ uses. It's the best woofer I've ever used.http://aespeakers.com/product-category/td/
I think Austin Acoustics makes a system using ALE and it's excellent! They may have their own version of the drivers, I'm not sure.
http://www.austinacoustic.net/home-12.html
Yes, pro stuff is designed not to compress at high levels and at typical audiophile levels it is loafing along with huge headroom and relaxed presentation. This goes also for non-horn loaded large cones with 95+dB for bass and mids. The lack of strain is evident.
Hello morricab
I accept it as an issue but not under typical home listening conditions. Who runs their equipment that hard? I know I don't. Lets just look at the long term average as it is well understood and documented. The transient heating effects on peaks still seems to be up in the air. Here is a reference that some may find helpful. This is quite old but still relevant.
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?4746-JBL-Technical-Notes-Volume-1-Number-9
As I see it many systems are on the wrong side of the power curve and being logarithmic it is very unforgiving. Lets say as an example most system fall in between 83db and 103db definitely a bell curve with most bunched in the middle with a bias for the low side. I think that is a fare assessment.
The 20 db difference represents a 100 watt power input difference between the 83 vs the 103db systems. So 1 watt for 103db and 100 watts input for the 83db system to have equal output. At 100 watts input that system will be experiencing measurable power compression. Look at figure 5 posted. That is 15" pro driver. Looking at the text that a very consistent 1.25 db. How audible would that be with music??
I agree that many non pro drivers would not do as well under the same conditions. This reference is ancient and actually goes hand in hand with the previous one I posted. Thermal management in drivers has been improved through vented gap, ferrofluid, better heat sinking and so on,
I don't see many of us running that much average power at typical listening levels. That is just my take on it. So we may experience some power compression at times but that would also be very system specific. If your speakers are in the mid 80's obviously you run a much better chance of this being an issue where on systems in the high 90's it very unlikely that it would be an issue.
Take a look at figure 7 posted which clearly shows the driver response differences vs voice coil temp that you had mentioned. This is a pro 18" woofer under very high power conditions.
Rob
Attachments
I believe implementation trumps design philosophy every time.
There are probably more ways to screw up implemention of a design than to get it right. Proper implementation of poor designs usually don't last. I wonder if it's easier to execute well or poorly than to arrive at an innovative design that bears the test of time?
The more I think about the macro-micro definition, the more I think it's about amplitude for many people. There can be pianissimo to piano and pianissimo to mezzo forte both within a single bar, but the former can be as dynamic as the latter though many will identify the latter as the more dynamic. Stretch it out over several bars (crescendo) and while there is change in dynamics, we don't characterize that as dynamic - at least in this thread. Even at low volumes the ability of a speaker properly to represent a single accented note tells me it is dynamic. I may not use the proper vocabularly here, but it seems more about response time or responsiveness. And imo, the source can have at least as much influence on that as the speaker.
So while some may say a speaker is dynamic because of upper bass hump or some other hump, or frequency emphasis, that doesn't work for me.
That is a slight misinterpretation. The year long search had no proper audition of a proper horn, in fact the thread showed how difficult it was to audition one
I believe implementation trumps design philosophy every time.
Cessaro (not Tang's) is a good example of this. If you put the TAD 4003 and 1601c or such together, you will easily be many times better than Wagner, Chopin, or Liszt
Similar threads
